Apple v. Samsung II damages breakdown revealed in jury verdict form

“The U.S. District Court for Northern California late Friday made public the Apple v. Samsung jury’s verdict form, revealing exact damages figures assigned to each device found in infringement of parties’ patents,” Mikey Campbell reports for AppleInsider. “After the Apple v. Samsung jury handed in its decision earlier today, awarding Apple $119.6 million and Samsung $158,000, the final verdict form has been made available for public viewing. The document offers further insight into the jury’s thinking.”

“Apple’s final damages tally may be a bit higher as the company found a discrepancy in the jury’s verdict. Specifically, the Galaxy S II was found to be in infringement of the text prediction property, but no damages were assigned. Jurors are scheduled to meet on Monday to resolve the issue,” Campbell reports. “a large chunk of Apple’s award came from Samsung’s Galaxy S III, which cost the company $52.4 million on infringement of the ‘647 patent alone. The Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch — Sprint’s version of the smartphone — generated $14.2 million on infringement of the ‘647 and ‘172 patents, while all accused Galaxy S II models amounted to a collective $31.1 million.”

Read more, and see the jury verdict form, in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Bill” for the heads up.]

Related article:
After seeking $2 billion, jury awards Apple just $120 million over Samsung’s infringement of two patents – May 2, 2014


  1. If Apple does not defend its patents, then it is telling their competitors that everything is up for grabs. This win makes Samsung think a bit for the next product.
    Apple won judgements for several patent infringements. It will allow Apple to continue to put pressure on current products.
    The money is not necessarily the issue. Apple will probably break even after court costs are taken into account.

    1. This ruling tells competitors to copy the leader to gain market share for cheap and still make billions before the courts can rule you our a few pennies on the dollar for your thievery. Samsung wouldn’t have the market share they have today if not for their actions the copy the iPhone.

      1. I do not think that is completely true. Samsung has a larger product range than the iPhone and covering a wider price band. This means iPhone has a limited portion of the marketplace even considering its products and Samsung a much wider one. That is nothing to do with the fact that one party may have copied the other. Another point is these cases apply to older models so do not have a large effect on current market share.

  2. Also the media fails to point out that Apple did not purposely violate those patents. Samsung did. Why is the media leaving out that key information?

    1. If you all don’t like the current system , please describe a better alternative. The courts are like democracy–the worst possible system except for every other. Be specific. Describe something that is practical, affordable, and better at protecting our rights than the American court system.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.