直 Japanese PDF Font
  • 我们的专业人员
  • 服务
  • 我们的见解
  • 办公室
  • 事务所
  • 人才招聘
Finnegan
  • 新闻
  • 飞翰事实
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • 慈善性法律援助
  • 管理层
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

James R. Barney

Samsung Wins At Supreme Court in $400 Million Battle Over Apple iPhone Design

December 6, 2016

Forbes

On December 6, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Samsung Electronics in Samsung v. Apple, tossing a nearly $400 million Federal Circuit decision which ordered Samsung to pay damages equal to its entire profit from smartphones with design elements that infringed Apple’s iPhone design. The Supreme Court disagreed with the Federal Circuit’s stance on awarding total profit damages for infringing a component of a product [article of manufacture], as a component may be integrated into a larger product. Forbes contacted Finnegan attorney Elizabeth D. Ferrill for her thoughts on the decision.

Ferrill believes that the Supreme Court didn’t provide much guidance on how to determine what a design patent covers or how much it might contribute to damages. She said the decision leaves the Federal Circuit to develop a test for determining what exactly a given patent covers and how to apportion damages for an "article of manufacture". Ferrill said, "Given the paucity of cases in this once-arcane area of patent law, courts have a lot of work ahead of them to define the boundaries of design patents and the damages available when they infringed."

Tags

Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc., damages

Related Practices

全球知识产权维权、诉讼与审判

联邦巡回法院和最高法院上诉

Related Industries

消费品

电子与计算机技术

Related Professionals

Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Related News

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Recognized Again Among Germany’s Leading Law Firms

October 9, 2026

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Summary Determination of No Violation in ITC Vehicle Space Guards Investigation for Drop Stop

October 6, 2026

Commentary

Federal Circuit Revives Whistleblower Complaint Over VA's AI Claims-Processing Tool

September 25, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Named an IP Litigation Powerhouse in BTI Litigation Outlook 2027

September 24, 2026

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Precedential Pro Bono Federal Circuit Victory for AI Whistleblower

September 23, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Receives Top Tier Rankings in World Trademark Review’s Inaugural Copyright 1000 2026

September 23, 2026

Commentary

New Thomas Pink Womenswear Lines Strain ‘Pink’ Pact with Victoria’s Secret

September 21, 2026

Commentary

Pepsi's U.S. Trademark Dispute Could Reshape Brand Choices, Lawsuit Strategy, Lawyers Say

September 17, 2026

Commentary

Jellycat’s ‘Dupe’ Dilemma: Can IP Protect a ‘Cute’ Aesthetic?

September 16, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • 隐私
  • 免责申明
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP