Free Verdict Sheet - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 1 of 14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

LML PATENT CORP. vs. Plaintiff,

Civil Action No.

04-858-SLR

TELECHECK SERVICES, INC. ELECTRONIC CLEARING HOUSE, INC., XPRESSCHEX, INC., AND NOVA INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC. Defendants.

Judge Sue L. Robinson

DEFENDANTS' PROPOSED SPECIAL VERDICT FORM

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 2 of 14

We, the jury, unanimously find as follows: INFRINGEMENT 1. Do you find that LML has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that TeleCheck literally infringes the asserted claims of United States Patent No. 5,484,988 ("the `988 patent")? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck) NO ____ (for TeleCheck)

2. If you found that TeleCheck literally infringed any asserted claim of the `988 patent, has LML shown by clear and convincing evidence that TeleCheck's infringement was willful.1 YES ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for TeleCheck)

1

Defendants maintain that the issues of willfulness and damages should be bifurcated from issues of liability, and reference to such issues in this draft proposal is subject to Defendants' pending motion to bifurcate.

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 3 of 14

3. Do you find that LML has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that Nova literally infringes the asserted claims of the `988 patent? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova) NO ____ (for Nova)

4. If you found that Nova literally infringed any asserted claim of the `988 patent, has LML shown by clear and convincing evidence that Nova' s infringement was willful. YES ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for Nova)

2

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 4 of 14

5. Do you find that LML has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that ECHO/XpressChex literally infringe the asserted claims of the `988 patent? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) YES ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex)

6. If you found that ECHO/Xpresschex literally infringed any asserted claim of the `988 patent, has LML shown by clear and convincing evidence that ECHO/Xpresschex' s infringement was willful. YES ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for ECHO/XpressChex)

3

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 5 of 14

VALIDITY 7. Do you find that Defendants have proven by clear and convincing evidence that any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent are invalid as anticipated. Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

4

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 6 of 14

8. Do you find that Defendants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that the subject matter of any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

5

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 7 of 14

9. Do you find that Defendants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent are invalid for lack of enablement? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

6

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 8 of 14

10. Do you find that Defendants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent are invalid for failure to satisfy the written description requirement? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

7

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 9 of 14

11. Do you find that Defendants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent are invalid on the ground of indefiniteness? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

8

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 10 of 14

12. Do you find that Defendants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent are invalid because LML introduced new matter by amendment during prosecution of the `988 patent? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

9

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 11 of 14

13. Do you find that Defendants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent are invalid because Robert R. Hills and Henry R. Nichols, the inventors listed on the face of the `988 patent, did not solely invent the subject matter sought to be patented? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

10

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 12 of 14

14. Do you find that Defendants have shown by clear and convincing evidence that any of the asserted claims of the `988 patent are invalid due to the on-sale bar? Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 14 Claim 16 Claim 18 YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) YES ____ (for Defendants) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML) NO ____ (for LML)

11

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 13 of 14

DAMAGES Answer the following questions only if you find at least one of the `988 patent claims both valid and infringed. 15. What is the total amount of damages that should be awarded to LML for TeleCheck' s infringement through December 31, 2005? $ ______________________________ 16. What is the total amount of damages that should be awarded to LML for Nova' s infringement through December 31, 2005? $ ______________________________ 17. What is the total amount of damages that should be awarded to LML for ECHO/XpressChex' s infringement through December 31, 2005? $ _____________________________

12

Case 1:04-cv-00858-SLR

Document 563

Filed 03/16/2006

Page 14 of 14

We, the jurors, by signing below, indicate our unanimous verdict. Dated: _________________________ ______________________________(Foreperson) ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________

80031395.doc

13