Federal Circuit Resists Samsung’s ‘Quest for Apportionment’

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 21 No. 7
Legal and Court Case Update
July 2015

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in this product:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (1,072 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
4813 Telephone Communications, Except Radiotelephone
334220 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing
intellectual property
damages, lost profits, patent infringement, expert testimony, causation, reasonable royalty, apportionment, non-infringing alternative
Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (V)
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 8096
May 18, 2015
US
Federal Court
Federal Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Terry Musika, Julie L. Davis (plaintiff); Michael Wagner (defendants)
Probst

Summary

Federal Circuit rejects Samsung’s call for apportioning damages related to design patent infringement, saying the proposed treatment would conflict with the express language of the applicable statute; court upholds most of $1 billion award to Apple.

See Also

Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (V)

Full Text of Court Cases
May 18, 2015

Federal Circuit rejects Samsung’s call for apportioning damages related to design patent infringement, saying the proposed treatment would conflict with the express language of the applicable statute; court upholds most of $1 billion award to Apple.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation UpdateVol. 21 No. 7
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition