As the jury slogs through the twenty-page final verdict form in the Apple vs. Samsung trial, it has given its decision on one of the more critical aspects of the case: whether Samsung infringed on Apple's design patents for the look and feel of its devices. The jury needed to decide the issue on four different design patent as they apply to over over a dozen different Samsung devices, and furthermore had to also distinguish between three different corporate entities. In short, it was a nightmare.

The jury has decided that Samsung did infringe on iPhone design patents with multiple devices. With the D'677 design patent, the jury said "yes" to devices from the Fascinate to the various iteration of the Galaxy S II to the Vibrant. On the '087 patent, the story was the mianly same: yes to nearly all of the devices, including the Galaxy S, Infuse 4G, and more. The same story applied to the '305 patent, with multiple devices infringing. In some of the above cases, however, there were a few that did not infringe, depending especially on which corporate entity was involved.

D'677 Patent (Question 5):

Accused Samsung Product Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC.
Fascinate Yes Yes
Galaxy Ace No NA
Galaxy S i9000 Yes NA
Galaxy S 4G Yes Yes
Galaxy S II (AT&T) Yes Yes
Galaxy S II (i9100) Yes NA
Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) Yes Yes
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) Yes Yes
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) Yes Yes
Galaxy S Showcase Yes Yes
Infuse 4G Yes Yes
Mesmerize Yes Yes
Vibrant Yes Yes

D'087 Patent (Question 6):

Accused Samsung Product Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC.
Galaxy S (i9000) Yes NA
Galaxy S 4G Yes Yes
Galaxy S II (AT&T) No No
Galaxy S II (i9100) No NA
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) No No
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) No No
Infuse 4G No No
Vibrant Yes Yes

D'305 Patent (Question 7):

Accused Samsung Product Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC.
Captivate Yes Yes
Continuum Yes Yes
Droid Charge Yes Yes
Epic 4G Yes Yes
Fascinate Yes Yes
Galaxy S (i9000) Yes NA
Galaxy S 4G Yes Yes
Galaxy S Showcase Yes Yes
Gem Yes Yes
Indulge Yes Yes
Infuse 4G Yes Yes
Mesmerize Yes Yes
Vibrant Yes Yes

On the iPad design patents, the jury ruled that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 WiFi and Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE did not infringe on the Apple's design patents. Interestingly, the jury awarded damages for the Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE infringing, but as you can see below,it found the tablet did not infringe. Judge Lucy Koh has instructed the jury to revisit its findings on the '889 patent.

D'889 Patent (Question 8):

Accused Samsung Product Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC.
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (Wi-Fi) No No NA
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE) No NA No

A separate question on all of these patents is whether or not Samsung's should have known that it was infringing on Apple's patents. In all of the devices involved, when the jury ruled that there was infringement it also ruled that Samsung should have known. Yet another question is whether the infringement was willful, an important piece in determining damages. The jury's decision was that the infringement was willful on all patents with the exception of the '087 and the '889 patents.

You can find descriptions of the above patents in our guide to the trial, here.