Broad Definition of "Article of Manufacture" Costs Apple $400M

December 06, 2016
Post by No items found.

Since May 2015, Filewrapper, along with the intellectual property community, has been closely watching the heated Apple v. Samsung design patent and trade dress row.  On December 6th, the Supreme Court upset the controversial $400 million damages award to Apple, essentially holding that such penalties are available for the "article of manufacture,"which may not mean the product as a whole.

In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Federal Circuit decision awarding profits based on sale of the entire phone was overturned, favoring a broad interpretation of the "article of manufacture"phrase contained within the patent statute. Applying this construction, the Supreme Court reasoned that profits are to be award based on features at issue, rather than the entire product.

The case is remanded for a determination by the Federal Circuit as to whether the "article of manufacture"within each design patent is the smartphone itself or a particular component. Nevertheless, this decision by the Court seems to indicate that in context of design patents, plaintiffs should be prepared to provide argument and evidence as to the value of the particular component of interest in addition to the value of the entire product.

The full decision is available here.

Post Categories

Comments (0)
Post a Comment

Captcha Image
Return to the Filewrapper Blog

Search Posts


The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.


McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.