IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

FUJITSU LIMITED, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Nos. 09 C 4530

) 12 C 3229

TELLABS, INC., )

TELLABS OPERATIONS, INC., and ) Judge James F. Holderman

TELLABS NORTH AMERICA, INC., )

)

Defendants. )

VERDICT OF THE JURY

(Preliminary Form)

We, the jury, unanimously find and report based on the evidence presented at the trial and 

the law provided to us in the Final Jury Instructions, the following as the verdict of the jury:

Question 1: Has Tellabs proven that Fujitsu in its May 27, 1996 letter and Patent 

Statement (Tellabs Exhibit 1) agreed to license Fujitsu’s ‘737 Patent’s technology on RAND 

terms in compliance with the ITU’s patent policies?

Answer: Yes No

If the answer to Question 1 is “Yes,” please answer Question 2. If the answer to 

Question 1 is “No,” please sign the verdict form and do not answer any other questions.

Question 2: Has Tellabs proven that Fujitsu’s ‘737 Patent’s technology was included 

in the standardized technology recommended by ITU-T standard G.692 titled, “Optical interfaces 

for multichannel systems with optical amplifiers?”

Answer: Yes No

If the answer to Question 2 is “Yes,” please answer Question 3. If the answer to 

Question 2 is “No,” please sign the verdict form and do not answer any other questions.

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 216-1 Filed: 07/07/14 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:4258
Question 3: Has Tellabs proven that Fujitsu breached its agreement to license Fujitsu’s 

‘737 Patent’s technology on RAND terms by:

(a) Fujitsu not offering Tellabs a license on RAND terms for Fujitsu’s ‘737 

Patent’s technology?

Answer: Yes No

(b) Fujitsu filing a lawsuit against Tellabs seeking injunctive relief based upon 

alleged infringement of Fujitsu’s ‘737 Patent?

Answer: Yes No

(c) Fujitsu filing a lawsuit against Tellabs seeking a non-RAND royalty rate 

based on alleged infringement of Fujitsu’s ‘737 Patent?

Answer: Yes No

(d) Fujitsu filing a lawsuit against Tellabs seeking damages in the form of lost 

profits based on alleged infringement of Fujitsu’s ‘737 Patent?

Answer: Yes No

(e) Fujitsu filing a lawsuit against Tellabs alleging infringement of the ‘737 

Patent that damaged Tellabs’ business?

Answer: Yes No

(f) Fujitsu filing a lawsuit against Tellabs alleging infringement of the ‘737 

Patent that required Tellabs to devote management attention and time, as 

well as other resources to defending the lawsuit, such as attorney’s fees,

expert fees, and related costs?

Answer: Yes No

If the answer to any part of Question 3 is “Yes,” please answer Question 4. If the answer 

to each part of Question 3 is “No,” please sign the verdict from, and do not answer any other 

questions.

2

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 216-1 Filed: 07/07/14 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:4259
Question 4: Has Tellabs proven that Tellabs would have been willing to license 

Fujitsu’s ‘737 Patent’s technology from Fujitsu on RAND terms in compliance with ITU’s 

patent policies, if Fujitsu had offered Tellabs RAND terms for such a license?

Answer: Yes No

If the answer to Question 4 is “Yes,” please answer question 5. If the answer to Question 

4 is “No,” please sign the verdict form and do not answer any other questions.

Question 5: Has Tellabs proven that Fujitsu’s breach of its agreement to license on 

RAND terms Fujitsu’s ‘737 Patent’s technology was willful, in that Fujitsu’s breach was 

intentional, knowing and with conscious disregard for Tellabs’ rights, or alternatively, was done 

with reckless disregard for Tellabs’ obvious or known rights?

Answer: Yes No

Please each sign and date below. Then notify the marshal. The Foreperson should bring this 

signed and dated Final Verdict Form into the courtroom to return the Jury’s Verdict.

____________________________________

Foreperson

____________________________________

Juror

____________________________________

Juror

____________________________________

Juror

____________________________________

Juror

____________________________________

Juror

____________________________________

Juror

____________________________________

Juror

Date:

3

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 216-1 Filed: 07/07/14 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:4260