The giant multi$-$billion$-$dollar tech corporation Apple has claimed that Samsung deliberately copied the $$look and feel$$ and designs of the iPad and the iPhone, and that Samsung had produced devices that directly infringed upon multiple design patents. This included the Galaxy S Phones and the Galaxy Tablets. Apple$$s complaint included specific federal claims for utility and design patent infringement, false designation of origin, unfair competition, and trademark infringement, Apple$$s trade dresses$$ dilution related to iPhone, as well as state$-$level claims for unfair competition, common law trademark infringement, and unjust enrichment. Among these claims are Apple$$s patents on iPhone's "Bounce$-$Back Effect" $($US Patent No$.7,469,381),"$On$-$screen Navigation" $($US Patent No$.7,844,915),$ and "Tap To Zoom" $($US Patent No$.7,864,163),$ and design patents that covers iPhone's features such as the "home button, rounded corners and tapered edges" $($US D$593087)$ and $"$On$-$Screen Icons" $($US D$604305).$ In response, Samsung counterclaimed that Apple had infringed on several of their patents relating to wireless telecommunications and camera phones. Samsung blamed Apple for not paying royalties for using its wireless transmission technology. Specifically, Samsung had patents covering the use of email in a camera phone and allowing users to multi$-$task while listening to music in the background. They claimed that iPhones would not exist if it were not for the breakthroughs Samsung scientists and engineers had made nearly twenty years before the first iPhone$$s were even marketed. The case has always been about more than money. It revolved around a number of utility and design patents for basic functions of a smartphone, like tap to zoom and the home screen app grid. But while the fight was hashed out using specific patents, the battle was ultimately about whether Samsung copied Apple to gain an edge. Money was hardly the issue here $$ and really, the amounts being discussed never amounted to anything substantial for either company. On a survey made to public, majority of iPhone users deliberated that $$they don$$t think they have ever had trouble differentiating their iPhone from one of their friend$$s Galaxy$$s$,$ and there hasn$$t been a single time where they have used a Galaxy and they didn$$t need at least a minute to get acquainted with its user interface because it is NOT the same as iPhone.$$ While the two companies are urged to sit at the table to negotiate and they have shown some willingness to compromise in an effort to avoid going to court, Apple filed a motion asking the presiding judge to bar the sale of Samsung$$s Galaxy Tab $10\mathrm{.}1$ on the grounds that the tablet was designed to $$mirror$$ Apple$$s second$-$generation iPad.

Given that Samsung is one of Apple$$s biggest suppliers, the companies have a strong incentive to move beyond their dispute and build on their ongoing partnership. Yet the two$-$day mediated talks between the CEOs in late May, ended in an impasse, with both sides refusing to back down

from their arguments. As the dispute continues, Apple and Samsung, the long$-$lasting partners are becoming grudging participants reluctant to actively engage in finding a solution to one of the most important patent battle of the century. They are becoming contentious and uncooperative. Both parties are concerned about the bitter end.

In an effort to discuss a settlement with Samsung, the Apple CEO writes an email as follows: $$We believe deeply in the value of design, and our teams work tirelessly to create innovative products that delight our customers. Apple ignited the smartphone revolution with iPhone, and it is a fact that Samsung blatantly copied our design. It is important that we continue to protect the hard work and innovation of so many people at Apple. We do believe that if this case ends up in trial, the jury will agree that Samsung should pay for copying our products.$$ Samsung declined to comment.

Acknowledging the escalation of the issue between the two companies, Apple suggests settling the dispute through arbitration. Samsung agrees and the parties enter into an arbitration agreement and appoint arbitrators.Draft an arbitration clause in which you exchange your side of the dispute, position, and proposal for arbitration. Make sure you include information about the place of arbitration, rules of procedure, substantive law to apply to the dispute, composition of the arbitral panel and their expertise, and your position on the arbitral award as binding or non binding.