Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• ruling that patentee need not “show that a patented feature is the one and only reason for consumer demand” and explaining that such a requirement is too rigid and inflexible given the complexity of consumer preferences
• explaining that causal nexus can be shown with evidence that “a patented feature is one of several features that cause consumers to make their purchasing decisions”
• explaining that causal nexus can be shown with evidence that “a patented feature is one of several features that cause consumers to make their purchasing decisions”
• stating that “evidence that a feature significantly increases the desirability of a product incorporating that feature” may show that the feature “drives demand”
• explaining that causal nexus can be shown with evidence that “a patented feature is one of several features that cause consumers to make their purchasing decisions”
• explaining that causal nexus can be shown with evidence that “a patented feature is one of several features that cause consumers to make their purchasing decisions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).