`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`VIRNETX, INC.
`
`Plaintiff
`
`vs.
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION
`
`Defendant
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`CASE NO. 6:07 CV 80
`PATENT CASE
`
`VERDICT FORM
`
`In answering these questions, you are to follow all of the instructions I have given you in
`the Com1's Charge.
`
`1.
`
`Did VimetX prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Microsoft infringes Claims 1,
`10, or 12 of the' 135 Patent or Claims 1, 4, 15, 17, 20, 31, 33, or 35 of the' 180 Patent?
`
`Answer "Yes" or "No" for each Claim iri Column 1.
`
`2.
`
`Of the claims you have found infringe, if any, did VimetX prove by clear and convincing
`evidence that Microsoft's infringement was willful?
`
`Answer "Yes" or "No" for each Claim you have found infringes, if any, in Column 2.
`
`3.
`
`Did Microsoft prove by clear and convincing evidence that any of the listed claims of the
`following patents are invalid?
`
`Ifyou find the claim invalid answer "Yes," othenvise answer "No" in Column 3.
`
`EXHIBIT A-1
`
`VIRNETX EXHIBIT 2053
`Mangrove v. VirnetX
`Trial IPR2015-01047
`
`Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`Case 6:07 -cv-00080-LED Document 377 Filed 03/16/10 Page 2 of 2 PageiD #: 19817
`
`Column 1
`Infringement?
`
`Column2
`Willfulness?
`
`Column3
`Invalidity?
`
`'135 Patent
`
`Claim 1
`Claim 10
`Claim 12
`
`'180 Patent
`
`\te5
`
`I
`~
`A 0 ~
`
`a 1m
`Claim 20
`Claim 31
`Claim 33
`Claim35
`
`If you have found any claim infringed and valid, answer question 4; otherwise, do not
`answer question 4.
`
`4.
`
`What sum of money, if paid now in cash, do you find from a preponderance of the evidence
`would fairly and reasonably compensate VirnetX for Microsoft's infringement of the
`fo1lowing patents?
`
`'135 Patent
`
`Answer with the amount: $ 71 7
`
`175-D, M
`
`'180 Patent
`
`Answer with the amount: $ 31-r
`
`tv1
`
`Siened this J ~ day of March, 2010
`
`Jti!tY FOREPERSON
`
`2
`
`Page 2 of 2
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
