The ongoing case between Apple and Samsung stemming from a patent infringement case back in 2012 is all but set to move forward on May 14, with both companies having now submitted witness lists. Interestingly enough, there’s no sign of top executives from either company on those lists. That doesn’t mean that there won’t be any testimony provided by those individuals during the proceedings or that persons in executive positions haven’t been called. Having said that, their testimony is not likely to be as important in this case.
To win its case, Apple is going to need to convince the court that an “article of manufacture” is a complete smartphone and not just an individual component, according to Judge Lucy Koh. For those that may not recall, Apple has effectively claimed that Samsung copied the entire design for one of its smartphones. Samsung had claimed that, if an infringement occurred, the entire device was not copied based on the term “article of manufacture.” The case was initially moved to the Supreme Court for clarification on the term since there have been changes to what an article of manufacture is. However, the court did not ultimately clarify the matter, pushing the case back to the district court instead. So Apple is still seeking damages in the amount of the entire device’s value for which infringement seems to have happened. Meanwhile, Samsung will strive to show that only a portion of the design constitutes an infringement. That would lower the cost owed to Apple by the Korean smartphone manufacturer, if not act as the catalyst for yet another retrial.
For its purposes, Samsung is said to be relying on the expert testimony of Sam Lucente and Michael Wagner. Lucent will be discussing what, exactly, an “article of manufacture is and should be. Meanwhile, Wagner will be talking through what damages would be owed for the level of infringement Samsung claims to be relevant. Apple, on the other hand, will be calling for testimony from Ravin Balakrishnan, Alan Ball, Julie Davis, and Karan Singh. Davis will be particularly important to the case as a consultant who has experience with accounting and damages analysis. Having said that, each of the other witnesses has a background in technology and design so their statements may be equally important for Apple to prove its design argument.