`
`CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
`BY: ________________________________
`
`FILED
`
`DEPUTY
`
`July 21, 2023
`
`Jennifer Clark
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 2 of 6
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 2 of 6
`
`JURY VERDICT FORM
`
`When answering the following questions and filling out this Verdict Form, please follow
`
`the directions provided throughout the form. Your answer to each question must be unanimous.
`
`Some of the questions contain legal terms that are defined and explained in detail in the Jury
`
`Instructions. Please refer to the Jury Instructions if you are unsure about the meaning or usage of
`
`any legal term that appears in the questions below.
`
`As used herein, “Touchstream” means Touchstream Technologies Inc., and “Google”
`
`means Google LLC. Asused herein:
`
`“289 Patent”refers to U.S. Patent No. 8,904,289.
`
`“251 Patent” refers to U.S. Patent No. 8,356,251.
`
`528 Patent” refers to U.S. Patent No. 8,782,528.
`
`As used herein, the “Asserted Patents”collectively refers to the 289 Patent, 251 Patent, and
`
`528 Patent.
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 3 of 6
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 3 of 6
`
`We,the jury, unanimously agree to the answersto the following questions and return them
`as our verdictin this case.
`
`I.
`
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`Directions: Question No. 1
`
`In answering the Questions below, please check “Yes” or “No” for each listed asserted
`claim in the space provided.
`
`Question No. 1: Has Touchstream proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
`
`Google has infringed the following asserted claims of the Asserted Patents?
`
`“Yes”is in favor of Touchstream, and “No”is in favor of Google.
`
`Claim 14:
`
`289 Patent
`
`Claim 1:
`
`Yes i, No
`
`Claim 2:
`
`Yes
`
`/No
`
`251 Patent
`
`Claim 1:
`
`Yes Me /No
`
`Claim 8:
`
`Yes
`
`/No
`
`528 Patent
`
`Claim 1:
`
`Please proceed directly to Question No. 2.
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 4 of 6
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 4 of 6
`
`II.
`
`INVALIDITY
`
`Directions: Question No. 2
`
`In answering the Questions below, please check “Yes” or “No” for each listed asserted
`claim in the space provided.
`
`Question No. 2: Has Google proven by clear and convincing evidence that the
`
`following asserted claims ofthe Asserted Patents are invalid as obvious based on thepriorart?
`
`“Yes” is in favor of Google, and “No”is in favor of Touchstream.
`
`Claim 14;
`
`289 Patent
`
`Claim 1:
`
`Claim 2:
`
`251 Patent
`
`Claim 1:
`
`Claim 8:
`
`528Patent
`
`Claim 1:
`
`Please proceed to Question No. 3 only ifthere is at least one claim ofthe Asserted Patents
`
`for which you answered “Yes” in Question 1, andfor the same claim you answered “No”in
`
`both Question No. 2. Otherwise, please skip Question No. 3 and go directly to the last page to
`
`sign theform.
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 5 of6
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 5 of 6
`
`Ii,
`
`DAMAGES
`
`Question No. 3: What
`
`is the total amount of damages you find for Google’s
`
`infringement of the Asserted Patent(s)?
`
`a) 3877 LO, 006,
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 6 of 6
`Case 6:21-cv-00569-ADA Document 247 Filed 07/21/23 Page 6 of 6
`
`You have now reached the end of the verdict form and should review it to ensure it
`
`accurately reflects your unanimous determinations. After you are satisfied that your unanimous
`
`answersare correctly reflected above, your Jury Foreperson should then sign and date this Verdict
`
`Form in the spaces below. Oncethat is done, notify the Court Security Officer that you have
`
`reached a verdict. The Jury Foreperson should retain possession of the verdict form andbringit
`
`whenthe jury is brought back into the courtroom.
`
`I certify that the jury unanimously concurs in every elementofthe aboveverdict.
`
`Signed this @)“~ day of © lly , 2023.
`
`2
`
` JURY FOREPERSON
`
`
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
