Seventh Amendment does not require a jury trial for attorney-fees factual inquiries

AIA America v. Avid was decided on August 10, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. There, after the jury found against plaintiff AIA on patent ownership and co-inventorship, the district court found AIA lacked standing to assert the patents. After allowing “the parties to submit extensive briefing, evidence, …

District court erred in holding that Octane Fitness does not apply to the Lanham Act

Romag Fasteners v. Fossil was decided on August 9, 2017 on appeal from the District of Connecticut. There, after the jury returned a verdict for trademark and patent infringement for plaintiff Romag, the district court granted attorney fees under the Patent Act but not under the Lanham Act, finding that defendant …

Post hoc litigation misconduct supports adverse inference of specific intent to deceive the PTO

Regeneron v. Merus was decided on July 27, 2017 on appeal from the Southern District of New York. There, the district court held the asserted patent invalid because of plaintiff Regeneron’s inequitable conduct during prosecution. The district court first found that Regeneron withheld four references from the USPTO that were material. (The withheld references …

Case exceptional where plaintiff litigated after a conclusive Markman order, and had nuisance settlements

AdjustaCam v. Newegg was decided on July 5, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. There, Plaintiff AdjustaCam sued Defendant Newegg and dozens of other defendants for patent infringement, voluntarily dismissing most defendants early in the litigation. Though AdjustaCam continued to litigate against Newegg through a Markman order and extended …

Fees warranted where party showed pattern of suing and settling for sums below costs of defense

Rothschild v. Guardian was decided on June 5, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. There, the district court granted plaintiff Rothschild’s voluntary motion to dismiss. The court then denied defendants’ cross motion for attorney fees because Rothschild voluntarily withdrew its complaint within Rule 11’s safe harbor period (motions for …

No irreparable harm where the parties don’t meaningfully compete, and where plaintiff licensed to others

Nichia v. Everlight was decided on April 28, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. The patents-in-suit disclosed designs and methods of manufacturing LED devices. After a bench trial, the district court found defendant Everlight infringed plaintiff Nichia’s patents, and that the patents were not invalid. The court then denied …

Fees warranted where party’s position went against the evidence and its own witnesses

Bayer v. Dow was decided on March 17, 2017 on appeal from the District of Delaware. There, after finding for defendant Dow on summary judgment, the district court awarded Dow attorney fees, concluding that plaintiff “Bayer’s weak positions on the merits and litigation conduct supported a finding that this was an exceptional …

Attorney fees warranted for litigant’s refusal to produce an issue-dispositive document

National Oilwell Varco v. Omron is a nonprecedential case decided on January 25, 2017 on appeal from the Western District of Texas. There, the district court dismissed the case with prejudice, finding that plaintiff Oilwell lacked standing, and awarded attorney fees to defendant Omron based on the exceptional nature of Oilwell’s litigation conduct. The …

Likely success not shown where the district court relied on erroneous claim construction

Chamberlain v. Techtronic is a nonprecedential case decided on January 25, 2017 on appeal from the Northern District of Illinois. There, the district court granted plaintiff Chamberlain a preliminary injunction, finding that Chamberlain had shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its infringement claim. Techtronic appealed. The Federal Circuit vacated the grant …

After frivolous appeal, appellant’s counsel held jointly and severally liable for fees and double costs

Walker v. Health International was decided on January 6, 2017 on appeal from the District of Colorado. There, the district court awarded defendant Health attorney fees and costs for plaintiff Walker’s vexatious actions in continuing to litigate after the parties settled all claims. Walker appealed. Health claimed the appeal was frivolous, and …