IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC, )
et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. )
)
CANON INC., et al., )
)
Defendants. )
_______________________)
Civ. No. 11-792-SLR
VERDICT SHEET
Dated: May 9, 2014
We, the jury, unanimously find as follows:
The '348 Patent
1. Has Intellectual Ventures proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Canon
has induced the infringement of the following claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,754,348 ("the
'348 patent") for the accused cameras in the following modes?
Please answer "yes" or "no" in each box.
"Yes" is a finding for Intellectual Ventures. "No" is a ftnding for Canon.
If you answer "no" to independent claim 1 for a particular product, you must
answer "no" to claims 2 and 3 for that particular product as well.
AF-Point Zoom in AF-Point Zoom in MF-Point Zoom in
Center Auto Focus Face Detect Auto Manual Focus
mode Focus mode mode
Claim 1
NO
f\}0
I
rJO
Claim2
No rJO NO
Claim 3
l'fe) Nu f\JO
2. Has Canon proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that the following claims of
the '348 patent are invalid because a prior art reference anticipated the claimed subject
matter?
"Yes" is a finding for Canon. "No" is a finding for Intellectual Ventures.
If you answer "no" to independent claim 1, you must answer "no" to claims 2 and
3 as well.
YES
I
NO
Claim 1
I
I
/
Claim2
I
Claim3
I
/
3. Has Canon proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that the following claims of
the patent are invalid because the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention?
"Yes" is a finding for Canon. "No" is a finding for Intellectual Ventures.
If you answer "no" to independent claim 1 , you must answer "no" to claims 2 and
3 as well.
YES
NC)
Claim 1

Claim2

Claim 3
v
The '960 Patent
4. Has Intellectual Ventures proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Canon
has induced the infringement of the following claims of U.S. Patent No.6, 121,960 ("the
'960 patent") for the accused Vixia camcorders?
"Yes" is a finding for Intellectual Ventures. "No" is a finding for Canon.
If you answer "no" to independent claim 19, you must answer "no" to claim 20 as
well.
YES NO
Claim 19
.fu
Claim 20 v
5. Has Canon proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that the following claims of
the '960 patent are invalid because a prior art reference anticipated the subject
matter?
"Yes" is a finding for Canon. "No" is a finding for Intellectual Ventures.
If you answer "no" to independent claim 19, you must answer "no" to claim 20 as
well.
I
YES
~
Claim 19 I
./
Claim20 \
v
6. Has Canon proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that the following claims of
the '960 patent are invalid because the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to a person of ordinary skill in 1he art at the time of the claimed invention?
"Yes" is a finding for Canon. "No" is a finding for Intellectual Ventures.
If you answer "no" to independent claim 19, you must answer "no" to claim 20 as
well.
YES
N9
Claim 19
I;
Claim20
v'