Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 1 of 15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Degelman Industries, Ltd.,
Plaintiff,
v.
Pro-Tech Welding & Fabrication, Inc.
and Michael Weagley,
Defendant ( s) .
06-CV-6346
VERDICT FORM
In accordance with the Court's instructions,
please answer the following questions. Your
answers for each question must be unanimous.
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 2 of 15
FINDINGS ON DEGELMAN'S CLAIMS
DEGELMAN'S UTILITY AND DESIGN PATENT CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS
1. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech Welding and Fabrication, Inc. ("Pro-Tech"),
and/or Michael P. Weagley ("Weagley"), has infringed Claim 1 of the ' 576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
.
Accused Defe.ndant ProduCt
Pr.o-Tech Welding and
'li
MichlicJ P. Weagley
Fabrication,
SPL Loader
Ve> Ye->
SPB Backhoe
ie.> res
SPS Skidsteer
Ye-.>
_ye>
SPC Compact
Yes
YE>
IST Loader
Yt:5
ye;
1ST Backhoe


1ST Skidsteer
J'E> YGJ
PBS Pullback
fE:f

F(L Foldout


FTF Forklift
y'_&>
y-e>
SBL Switchblade Loader
'(e> Ye5
SSB Switchblade Backhoe

vy;_
II::
SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
res
ye5
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 3 of 15
Super Duty Loader
- 2-
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 4 of 15
2. For each of the following products, has Degclman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 2 of the
'576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
Pro-Tech Welding and
Michael P. leagle1;
Fabrication, Inc.
SPL Loader

VeA
I.
SPB Backhoe
ve:s
I
SPS Skidsteer
'{G> [;J
SPC Compact

k/t1
IST Loader
ye;s (;;b.;
IST Backhoe
ye5
1ST Skidsteer
'{:> CfM
PBS Pullback
'{:5


I
Foldout
ye;
lj_!VJ
FTF Forklift

I
Vtv.J
SBL Switchblade Loader
re>
{;/b)
SSB Switchblade Backhoe
ye;

SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
'{.)

Super Duty Loader
rt::'
I
..,
- j -
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 5 of 15
3. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 3 of the
'576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
SPL Loader
SPB Backhoe
SPS Skidsteer
SPC Compact
1ST Loader
IST Backhoe
1ST Skidsteer
PBS Pullback
,
F$L Foldout
FTF Forklift
SBL Switchblade Loader
SSB Switchblade Backhoe
SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
Super Duty Loader
Pro-Tech Welding and
Fabrication, Inc.
-4 -
Michael P. Weagley
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 6 of 15
4. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 4 of the
'576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
SPL Loader
SPB Backhoe
SPS Skidsteer
SPC Compact
1ST Loader
IST Backhoe
IST Skidsteer
PBS Pullback
FTF Forklift
SBL Switchblade Loader
SSB Switchblade Backhoe
SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
Super Duty Loader
Pro-Tech Welding and
Fabrication, Inc.
11 0/V
..,
- 5-
Michael P. Weagley
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 7 of 15
5. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 5 of the
'576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an ''N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
SPL Loader
SPB Backhoe
SPS Skidsteer
SPC Compact
1ST Loader
IST Backhoe
IST Skidsteer
PBS Pullback
FTF Forklift
SBL Switchblade Loader
SSB Switchblade Backhoe
SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
Super Duty Loader
Pro-Tech Welding and
Fabrication, Inc.
- 6-
Michael .P. Weagley
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 8 of 15
6. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 6 of the
'576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
'
Accused Defendant Product
Pro-Tech Welding and
Michael P. Weagley
Fabrication, Inc.
SPL Loader

Jj_t4
SPB Backhoe
(J p /()A
.., .
SPS Skidsteer

1;/u
SPC Compact
UY
y_f)A
1ST Loader
.I

L;{k
IST Backhoe
,I "
C/o.A
I
I
1ST Skidsteer

{/u
PBS Pullback


p
F:IJL Foldout
'VP--1
Vu
FTF Forklift
uj!A
SBL Switchblade Loader
(jQ/J

SSB Switchblade Backhoe
Jl4M
I

SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
VM
L;I/.J
Super Duty Loader
VIr 'fr
I

J
- 7-
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 9 of 15
7. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 7 of the
'576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N'' for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
SPL Loader
SPB Backhoe
SPS Skidsteer
SPC Compact
IST Loader
IST Backhoe
1ST Skidsteer
PBS Pullback
FBL Foldout
FTF Forklift
SBL Switchblade Loader
SSB Switchblade Backhoe
SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
Super Duty Loader
Pro-Tech Welding and
Fabrication, Inc.
- 8 -
Michael P. Weagley
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 10 of 15
8. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Wcagley, has infringed Claim 8 ofthe
'576 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
SPL Loader
SPB Backhoe
SPS Skidsteer
SPC Compact
IST Loader
IST Backhoe
IST Skidsteer
PBS Pullback
p
FI3L Foldout
FTF Forklift
SBL Switchblade Loader
SSB Switchblade Backhoe
SBS Switchblade Skidsteer
Super Duty Loader
Pro-Tech Welding and
Fabrication, Inc.
- 9-
Michael P. Weagley
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 11 of 15
9. For each of the following products, has Degclman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed the '097 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
Pro-Tech Welding and
Michael P. Weagley
Fabrication, Inc.
SPL Loader
NO
1/tf
SPB Backhoe
i/0
;V()
r
SPS Skidsteer
/v'O
;vo
SPC Compact
;flO
11/0
1ST Loader
)Jo
/11(/
1ST Backhoe
)VO jV()
IST Skidsteer
/Vo
N ~
PBS Pullback
;vd
jt((J
- 10-
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 12 of 15
-
10. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed the '128 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for ' 'no"
for each Defendant.)
..
- ~ - - -
- - - - - -- --
- ~ : . _
Accused Defendant Product
Pro-Tech Welding and
Michael P. Weagley
Fabrication, Inc.
SPL Loader jJ()
No
SPB Backhoe
IJO
No
SPS Skidsteer
No NO
SPC Compact
NO
No
IST Loader
/J()
;Jo
IST Backhoe
No No
IST Skidsteer
;VO f'/d'
PBS Pullback
tid
jVd
p
/JO !Vo
FJL Foldout
FTF Forklift
t/b
NO
- 11 -
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 13 of 15
11. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed the '129 Patent?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
Pro-Tech Welding and
Michael P. Weagley
Fabrication, Inc.
. ..
SPL Loader
No
fJI
SPB Backhoe
tfCJ
j{d
SPS Skidsteer
jJO j l / ~
SPC Compact
NCJ
)lo
IST Loader
No N6
IST Backhoe
N6 !fo
1ST Skidsteer
tJa lf6
PBS Pullback
tJo flO
- 12-
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 14 of 15
12. If you answered "Yes" to any of Questions 1 through 11, and thus found that any
Defendant has infringed any Degelman patent(s), has Degelman proven by clear and
convincing evidence that such Defendant's(s') infringement was willful?
(Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no"
for each Defendant.)
Accused Defendant Product
Pro-Tech Welding and
Michael P. Weagley
Fabrication, Inc.
'576 Patent (Claim 1)
;JO A/0
' 576 Patent (Claim 2)
J/()
ffd
'576 Patent (Claim 3)
/VO
; J ~
'576 Patent (Claim 4)
NO
po
'576 Patent (Claim 5)
Na
Nd
'576 Patent (Claim 6)
1/'0 IJ'()
'576 Patent (Claim 7)
/VO ;1/J
'576 Patent (Claim 8)
jJO
NO
'097 Patent
!/()
No
'128 Patent
NtJ
)/()
'129 Patent
J/0
)/0
- 13-
Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 15 of 15
13. Have Defendants proven by clear and convincing evidence that Degelman's asserted
utility and/or design patent claims are invalid?
' 576 Patent
Yes _i_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 1)
'576 Patent
Yes _X (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 2)
'576 Patent
Yes X (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 3)
'576 Patent
Yes _l_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 4)
' 576 Patent
Yes _!_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 5)
'576 Patent
Yes ....X
(for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 6)
'576 Patent
Yes _j_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 7)
'576 Patent
y ~ j _
(for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
(Claim 8)
'097 Patent Yes _i (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
' 128 Patent Yes _l_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
'129 Patent
y., j_
(for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman)
Dated: March ~ ' 2013
~ ~
- 14-