"Designer of Ordinary Skill in the Art" and "Ordinary Observer" Inappropriate for Determining Article of Manufacture

The court granted in part defendant's motion to exclude the testimony of plaintiff's technical experts because their application of the "designer of ordinary skill in the art" and "ordinary observer" standards to identify the relevant article of manufacture was improper. "The Court finds that there is no basis for importing these perspectives, which are used in the infringement and validity contexts, into the article of manufacture inquiry. Furthermore, the Court finds that introducing these perspectives risks confusing and misleading the jury. However, the Court declines [defendant's] request to exclude all of the material that [defendant] identified as related to these perspectives. . . . [M]uch of the DOSA-related testimony would be relevant and admissible if [the experts] instead testify to these points from their own perspectives as experts in industrial design and icon and graphical user interface design."

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al, 5-11-cv-01846 (CAND April 2, 2018, Order) (Koh, USDJ)