`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`PHILIP MORRIS PRODUCTS S.A.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`R.J. REYNOLDS VAPOR COMPANY,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-393-LO-TCB
`
`
`
`[REYNOLDS’S REVISED PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM
`
`When answering the questions and filling out this Verdict Form, please follow the
`
`instructions 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 Court’s
`
`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.
`
`In the verdict form, Plaintiff Philip Morris Products S.A. will be referred to as “Philip
`
`Morris.” Defendant R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company will be referred to as “Reynolds.”
`
`We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them
`
`under the instructions of this Court as our verdict in this case.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 1302-1 Filed 06/08/22 Page 2 of 5 PageID# 33278
`
`
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 9,814,265
`I.
`Question 1 – Literal Infringement: Do you find that Philip Morris has proven by a
`preponderance of the evidence that Reynolds has literally infringed any of the following claims
`of the ’265 Patent?
`Claim 1
`(independent)
`
`Claim 4
`(dependent)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`No
`
`Question 2 – Infringement by the Doctrine of Equivalents: Do you find that Philip Morris
`has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Reynolds infringed by the doctrine of
`equivalents any of the following claims of the ’265 Patent?
`Claim 1
`
`
`
`Yes
`(independent)
`
`Claim 4
`(dependent)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`No
`
`Question 3 – Invalidity: Do you find that Reynolds has proven by clear and convincing
`evidence that any of the following claims of the ’265 Patent are invalid as obvious?
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 1
`(independent)
`
`Claim 4
`(dependent)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`No
`
`Answer Question 4 below only if you have found at least one claim of the ’265 Patent is
`infringed and not invalid. If there are no such claims, move on to Part II.
`Question 4 – Damages: What sum of money, if any, did Philip Morris prove by a
`preponderance of the evidence would be adequate compensation for Reynolds’s infringement of
`the ’265 patent. Provide the amount below in dollars and cents. If you find Philip Morris is
`entitled to no damages, enter a “0” amount.
`
`
`$_______________________________
`
`OR
`
`$_______________________________
`
`(Running Royalty for Past Only)
`
`
`
`(Lump Sum for Life of Patent)
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 1302-1 Filed 06/08/22 Page 3 of 5 PageID# 33279
`
`II.
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 10,104,911
`
`Question 1 – Literal Infringement: Do you find that Philip Morris has proven by a
`preponderance of the evidence that Reynolds has literally infringed any of the following claims
`of the ’911 Patent with respect to any of the following products?
`
`
`VUSE Solo G2
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 11
`(dependent)
`Claim 13
`(dependent)
`
`
`VUSE Alto
`
`Claim 2
`(dependent)
`Claim 11
`(dependent)
`Claim 12
`(dependent)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`No
`
`No
`
`No
`
`No
`
`
`Question 2 – Infringement by the Doctrine of Equivalents: Do you find that Philip Morris
`has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Reynolds has infringed by the doctrine of
`equivalents any of the following claims of the ’911 Patent with respect to VUSE Alto only?
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 2
`(dependent)
`Claim 11
`(dependent)
`Claim 12
`(dependent)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`No
`
`No
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 1302-1 Filed 06/08/22 Page 4 of 5 PageID# 33280
`
`Question 3 – Invalidity: Do you find that Reynolds has proven by clear and convincing
`evidence that any of the following claims of the ’911 Patent are invalid as obvious?
`Claim 2
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`No
`
`
`(dependent)
`Claim 11
`(dependent)
`Claim 12
`(dependent)
`
`Claim 13
`(dependent)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`No
`
`No
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Answer Question 4 below only if you have found at least one claim is infringed and not
`invalid. If there are no such claims, move on to Part III.
`
`Question 4 – Damages: What sum of money, if any, did Philip Morris prove by a
`preponderance of the evidence would be adequate compensation for Reynolds’s infringement of
`the ’911 patent. Provide the amount below in dollars and cents. If you find Philip Morris is
`entitled to no damages, enter a “0” amount.
`
`
`$_______________________________
`
`OR
`
`$_______________________________
`
`(Running Royalty for Past Only)
`
`
`
`(Lump Sum for Life of Patent)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 1302-1 Filed 06/08/22 Page 5 of 5 PageID# 33281
`
`III. WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT
`
`Answer Question 1 and Question 2 below only for patents where you have found at least
`one claim is infringed and not invalid. If there are no such patents, your deliberations are
`complete. Please sign the form on the last page.
`
`1.
`Do you find that Philip Morris has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
`Reynolds’s infringement of either patent was willful?
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`If you answered “Yes” to Question 1, answer Question 2; if you answered “No” to Question
`1, skip Question 2 and your deliberations are complete.
`
`
`2.
`If so, for which patents do you find that Philip Morris has proven by a
`preponderance of the evidence that Reynolds’s infringement was willful?
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,814,265
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,104,911
`
`
`
`
`
`Yes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Please sign the form below.
`
`
`
`Jury Foreperson:______________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No
`
`No
`
`Date: ______________________
`
`4
`
`