Georgetown Rail v. Holland was decided on August 1, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. A jury found that defendant Holland willfully infringed plaintiff Georgetown Rail’s patent and award lost profits. The district court then denied Holland’s motion for JMOL, and enhanced damages based on the finding of willfulness. …
After a finding of willful infringement, a court may enhance damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284. This post deals primarily with finding willfulness, and not enhancing damages. From 2007-16, In Re Seagate was the law for finding willfulness. In June 2016, Halo v. Pulse rejected the Seagate test and established new …
After finding willful infringement, a court may enhance damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284. From 2007-16, In Re Seagate was the law for finding willfulness. Willfulness under Seagate first required the patentee showing that the infringer acted despite an objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of a valid patent. After this showing of objective recklessness, the …
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 …
Link to article on Law360. 2016 was a busy year for patent remedies. The U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases, one on willfulness and the other on design patent damages. The Federal Circuit made law on willfulness, enhancement, attorney fees, antitrust damages, preissuance patent damages, and laches. This article will review these …
Alfred E. Mann Foundation v. Cochlear was decided on November 17, 2016 on appeal from the Central District of California. There, the district court entered judgment finding claims of one asserted patent infringed and claims of another patent invalid for indefiniteness. The jury found that defendant Cochlear’s infringement was willful under …
WesternGeco v. ION was decided on September 21, 2016 on appeal from the Southern District of Texas. The case was on remand from the Supreme Court in light of Halo v. Pulse. At the district court, the jury found infringement and no invalidity as to all asserted claims, and awarded Plaintiff-WesternGeco lost profits …
Stryker v. Zimmer was decided on September 12, 2016 on appeal from the Western District of Michigan. There, a jury found plaintiff-Stryker’s patents valid and infringed, awarded $70 million in lost profits, and found that defendant-Zimmer willfully infringed under the then-controlling Seagate standard. The district court then issued an order rejecting Zimmer’s motion …
Halo v. Pulse was decided by the Federal Circuit on August 5, 2016 on appeal from the District of Nevada, on remand from the Supreme Court. There, a jury found that defendant Pulse had infringed plaintiff Halo’s patent, and that the infringement was probably willful. Applying the then-standard Seagate, the district …
Innovention v. MGA is a nonprecedential case decided on August 5, 2016 on appeal from the Eastern District of Louisiana. There, the district court, after a jury trial finding willfulness, awarded enhanced damages (on Seagate’s clear and convincing standard for willfulness) and attorney fees for defendant MGA’s infringement. The Federal Circuit …