throbber
Case 1:13-cv-00919-JLH Document 499 Filed 04/28/23 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 51399
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 13-919-JLH
`
`
`
`)))))))))
`
`
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.,
`
`
`
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`VERDICT FORM
`
`Instructions: When answering the following questions and completing this Verdict
`
`Form, please follow the directions provided and follow the Jury Instructions that you have been
`
`given. Your answer to each question must be unanimous. Some of the questions contain legal
`
`terms that are defined and explained 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:
`
`1. “Arendi” refers to Plaintiff Arendi S.A.R.L.;
`
`2. “Google” refers to Defendant Google LLC; and
`
`3. The “’843 Patent” refers to U.S. Patent No. 7,917,843.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-JLH Document 499 Filed 04/28/23 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 51400
`
`
`
`A. Infringement
`
`
`Question No. 1A – Direct Infringement:
`Did Arendi prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Google directly infringed any of the
`
`following claims of the ’843 Patent?
`
`“Yes” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`“No” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`
`
`Claim 23
`
`Claim 30
`
`NO
`(for Google)
`
`YES
`(for Arendi)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Question No. 1B – Induced Infringement:
`Did Arendi prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Google is liable for inducing
`
`infringement of any of the following claims of the ’843 Patent by third-party use of any of the
`
`accused applications?
`
`“Yes” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`“No” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`YES
`(for Arendi)
`
`NO
`(for Google)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 23
`
`Claim 30
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-JLH Document 499 Filed 04/28/23 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 51401
`
`
`
`Question No. 1C – Contributory Infringement:
`Did Arendi prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Google is liable for contributory
`
`infringement of any of the following claims of the ’843 Patent?
`
`“Yes” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`“No” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`
`
`Claim 23
`
`Claim 30
`
`NO
`(for Google)
`
`YES
`(for Arendi)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-JLH Document 499 Filed 04/28/23 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 51402
`
`
`
`B. Invalidity
`Question No. 2A – Anticipation:
`Did Google prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that any of the following claims of the ’843
`
`Patent are invalid as anticipated by prior art?
`
`“Yes” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`
`
`“No” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`
`
`Claim 23
`
`Claim 30
`
`NO
`(for Arendi)
`
`YES
`(for Google)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Question No. 2B – Obviousness:
`Did Google prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that any of the following claims of the ’843
`
`Patent are invalid as obvious in view of prior art?
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“Yes” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`
`
`“No” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`YES
`(for Google)
`
`NO
`(for Arendi)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 23
`
`Claim 30
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-JLH Document 499 Filed 04/28/23 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 51403
`
`
`
`If you answered “YES” in Question No. 1A, 1B, or 1C (Infringement Section) as to any
`patent claim AND answered “NO” in all of Question Nos. 2A and 2B (Invalidity Section) as
`to that same patent claim (i.e., you determined that at least one claim is infringed and not
`invalid), proceed to Questions 3, 4, 5, and 6.
`
`Otherwise, skip and DO NOT answer Questions 3,4, 5, and 6 and instead please proceed
`directly to the final page of this Verdict Form and sign and date that page.
`
`C. Damages
`Question No. 3:
`For any infringement you found in Question Nos. 1A-1C what is the earliest possible date of first
`
`infringement?
`
`“August 21, 2017” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`“December 5, 2017” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`
`
`
`
`August 21, 2017: ___________ or December 5, 2017: _____________
`
`
`Question No. 4:
`What amount of damages, if any, has Arendi proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it
`
`is entitled to as a reasonable royalty for Google’s infringement of the ’843 Patent?
`
`
`
`Answer: $ ______________
`
`
`Question No. 5:
`Does the amount you have determined in response to Question No. 4 include damages for Google
`
`apps installed on Samsung devices?
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“Yes” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`“No” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`Yes: ______________
`
`
`No: ______________
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-JLH Document 499 Filed 04/28/23 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 51404
`
`
`
`D. Willfulness
`Question No. 6:
`Did Arendi prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Google’s infringement of any of the
`
`claims of the ’843 Patent was willful?
`
`“Yes” is a finding in favor of Arendi.
`
`“No” is a finding in favor of Google.
`
`Yes: _________________
`
`
` No: _________________
`
`You have now reached the end of the verdict form and you should review it to ensure that
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`it entirely reflects your unanimous determinations. The Foreperson should then sign the verdict
`
`form in the space below and notify the Court Security Officer that you have reached a verdict. The
`
`Foreperson should retain possession of the verdict form and bring it to the courtroom with the jury.
`
`
`
`Signed: ____________________________________
`
`
`
`Dated: ___________________
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket