Apple v. Samsung

390 words | 2 page(s)

There are four elements of a case. These include the fact pattern, the issues, the outcome, and the ratio. The fact pattern consists of the facts that form the issues, the issues are the points of contention formed by the facts, and the outcome is composed of the decisions that were made by the arbiter. The ratio is the reasoning, the logical nexus between the fact pattern, the issues, and the outcome.

The Fact Pattern
In two separate lawsuits, Apple claimed that Samsung had infringed on three of its utility patents and four of its design patents. Apple filed the patents in 2007 and in 2011, the company claimed that Samsung phones and tablets “copied the look, product design, packaging and user interface of its products – violating its patents and trademarks” (Kane). In making their case, Apple representatives compared the Apple iPhone 3GS model and the Samsung Galaxy S i9000 model. In turn, Samsung alleged that Apple infringed on a number of its patents as well – countersuing for these claimed violations.

puzzles puzzles
Your 20% discount here.

Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Apple v. Samsung".

Order Now
Promocode: custom20

The Issues, the Outcome, and the Ratio
Did Samsung infringe on Apple’s patents and trademarks? Yes – The court upheld the validity of Apple’s patents and agreed that there had been “infringement of Apple utility, design patents for some –though not all products” by Samsung (Lowensohn). Did Apple infringe on Samsung’s patents and trademarks? No – The jury did not conclude that there was an infringement of Samsung’s patents. Who has a right to a remedy? Because Apple’s rights were violated, it has the right to a remedy. The court held that the “damages owed by Samsung” totaled $1.05 billion (Lowensohn). However, Apple’s request for an injunction was denied.
Controversy about a juror led to a retrial – in which the figure owed to Apple by Samsung was re-awarded. The amount was $290 million. During the second trial, filed in 2012 and schedule in 2014, the decision was favorable to Apple but the “jury also found that Apple had infringed one of Samsung’s patents” (The Guardian).

  • The Guardian. “Samsung Ordered To Pay Apple $120M for Patent Violation.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 02 May 2014. Web. 02 June 2014.
  • Kane, Yukari. “Apple: Samsung Copied Design.” The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 19 Apr. 2011. Web. 02 June 2014.
  • Lowensohn, Josh. “Jury Awards Apple More Than $1B, Finds Samsung Infringed.” CNET. CBS Interactive, 24 Aug. 2012. Web. 02 June 2014.

puzzles puzzles
Attract Only the Top Grades

Have a team of vetted experts take you to the top, with professionally written papers in every area of study.

Order Now