Supreme Court Review 2016/2017 TERM
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2017
CLICK HERE TO TRACK THIS CASE

Issue:  Component Patent Infringement

Samsung Electronics v. Apple

15-777

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED

Where a design patent is applied to only a component of a product, should an award of infringer’s profits be limited to those profits attributable to the component?

DECISION

Decided December 6, 2016 HOLDING

In the case of a multicomponent product, the relevant “article of manufacture” for arriving at a §289 damages award need not be the end product sold to the consumer but may be only a component of that product.

Author image Justice Sotomayor
Author Sotomayor
Agree image Justice Breyer
Agree Breyer
Agree image Justice Thomas
Agree Thomas
Recused image Justice Scalia
Recused Scalia
Agree image Chief Justice Roberts
Agree Roberts
Agree image Justice Kennedy
Agree Kennedy
Agree image Justice Ginsburg
Agree Ginsburg
Agree image Justice Alito
Agree Alito
Agree image Justice Kagan
Agree Kagan

SOTOMAYOR, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Text of Opinion
pdf download

ORAL ARGUMENT

Argued October 11, 2016

Appearences
On Behalf of Petitioners Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Kathleen M. Sullivan
On Behalf of United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioners
Brian H. Fletcher, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
On Behalf of Respondent Apple Inc.
Seth P. Waxman
Transcript
pdf download
Audio
mp3 download
Merit Briefs
Brief for Petitioners Samsung Electronics, Ltd, Samsung Electronics America, Inc, and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (pdf download)
Brief for Respondent Apple Inc. (pdf download)
Reply Brief for Petitioner (pdf download)
Amicus Curiae Briefs
Brief for 50 Intellectual Property Professors in Support of Petitioners (pdf download)
Brief for Engine Advocacy and Shapeways, Inc in Support of Petitioners (pdf download)
Brief for Public Knowledge, the electronic Frontier Foundation, the R Street Institute, the American Antitrust Institute, and IP Justice in Support of Petitioners (pdf download)
Brief for the Computer and Communications Industry Association in Support of Petitioners (pdf download)
Brief for the Hispanic Leadership Fund, the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and the National Grange of the Order of the Patrons of Husbandry in Support of Petitioners (pdf download)
Brief for the Internet Association, et al in Support of Petitioners (pdf download)
Brief for 113 Distinguished Industrial Design Professionals and Educators in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for American Intellectual Property Law Association in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for Bison Designs, LLC, et al in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for Boston Patent Law Association in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for Intellectual Property Professors in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for Nordock in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for Roger Cleveland Golf Company, Inc in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for the AAP Association in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for Tiffany and Company; Adidas AG; and Jenny Yoo Collection,Inc, in Support of Respondent (pdf download)
Brief for Crocs, Inc in Support of Affirmance (pdf download)
Brief for Industrial Designers Society of America in Support of Neither Party (pdf download)
Brief for the Association of the Bar of the City of New York in Support of Neither Party (pdf download)
Brief for the United States in Support of Neither Party (pdf download)
Brief of BSA - The Software Alliance in Support of Neither Party (pdf download)
Brief of Nike, Inc in Support of Neither Party (pdf download)

PROCEEDING BELOW

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided May 18, 2015
pdf download