Apple vs. Samsung: Federal Circuit Affirms $539M Design Patent Verdict in Landmark Smartphone Case

📋 Case Summary

Case Name Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Case Number 2017-2587 (Fed. Cir.)
Court Federal Circuit, Appeal from N.D. Cal.
Filing / Closure Apr 2011 - Oct 2018 7 years 6 months
Outcome Plaintiff Win - $539M Damages
Patents at Issue
Accused Products Samsung Galaxy S Series Smartphones
Plaintiff Counsel Morrison & Foerster LLP - Harold McElhinny
Defendant Counsel Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP - John Quinn
Termination Basis Jury Verdict - Design Patent Infringement

Case Overview

The Parties

⚖️ Plaintiff

Leading consumer electronics company and holder of extensive design patent portfolio covering smartphone aesthetics and user interface elements.

🛡️ Defendant

Global technology conglomerate and major smartphone manufacturer competing in the premium device market with Galaxy series products.

Patents at Issue

This landmark case involved three design patents covering fundamental smartphone design elements that shaped the modern smartphone industry:

🔍

Designing a similar product?

Check if your smartphone design might infringe these or related patents.

Run FTO Check →

The Verdict & Legal Analysis

Outcome

The jury found Samsung liable for infringing Apple's design patents and awarded $539 million in damages. This case established significant precedent for how design patent damages are calculated under 35 U.S.C. § 289.

Key Legal Issues

The Federal Circuit's analysis focused on the critical "article of manufacture" question — whether design patent damages should be based on the entire product or a component. The court held that the relevant article of manufacture was the smartphone itself.

✍️

Filing a design patent?

Learn from this case. Use AI to draft stronger claims that can withstand litigation.

Try Patent Drafting →

🚀 Power Your Patent Strategy with Eureka IP

From novelty searches to patent drafting, Eureka's AI-powered tools help you navigate the patent landscape with confidence.

⚠️ Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis

This case highlights critical IP risks in smartphone design. Choose your next step:

📋 Understand This Case's Impact

Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.

  • View all 47 related patents in this technology space
  • See which companies are most active in design patents
  • Understand claim construction patterns
📊 View Patent Landscape
⚠️
High Risk Area

Rectangular devices with rounded corners

📋
47 Related Patents

In smartphone design space

Design-Around Options

Available for most claims

✅ Key Takeaways

⚖️ For Patent Attorneys

Design patent damages can include total profits from products where design drives consumer demand.

Search related case law →

The "article of manufacture" determination is now a critical factual question affecting damages.

Explore precedents →

📊 For IP Professionals

Build robust design patent portfolios covering key aesthetic elements of flagship products.

Explore design patent landscape →

🔬 For R&D Teams

Document design evolution thoroughly and conduct FTO analysis before finalizing product aesthetics.

Start FTO analysis for my product →

Consider filing design patents early in the product development cycle.

Try AI patent drafting →

Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?

Join thousands of IP professionals using Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyze competitive landscapes.

⚖️ Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The analysis presented reflects publicly available case information and general legal principles. For specific advice regarding patent litigation, FTO analysis, or IP strategy, please consult a qualified patent attorney. Case outcomes depend on specific facts and circumstances that may differ from those discussed here.