Willfulness, enhancement, and attorney fees vacated

SRI International v. Cisco was originally decided on March 20, 2019, and modified on July 12, 2019 on appeal from the District of Delaware. In the modified opinion, the Federal Circuit vacated the award of attorney fees, which was based in part on the vacated willfulness finding, and remanded for further consideration …

Dismissal under Section 101 and subsequent grant of attorney fees are vacated

CellSpin Soft v. Fitbit was decided on June 25, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Plaintiff CellSpin filed more than a dozen cases alleging infringement of certain patents. On a motion to dismiss, the district court found that none of the asserted claims were patent eligible. The district court found the …

Case exceptional where Plaintiff did not perform a simple test of the publicly available accused products

ThermoLife v. GNC was decided on May 1, 2019 on appeal from the Southern District of California. Plaintiff ThermoLife brought suit against Defendant GNC, and other defendants, for patent infringement. This was one of 81 infringement lawsuits the exclusive licensee filed. The patents relate to “methods and compositions involving the amino …

Liability as to one claim does not support general damages, willfulness finding, enhancement, or attorney fees

Omega Patents v. CalAmp was decided on April 8, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of Florida. After the jury awarded plaintiff Omega approximately $2.98 million in compensatory damages, the district court trebled damages for willful infringement, awarded attorney’s fees to Omega, awarded damages for sales made subsequent to the jury verdict, …

A patent remedies case study on Saffran v. Johnson & Johnson

This post will track the issued remedies in the patent dispute between Bruce Saffran, M.D., Ph.D., and Boston Scientific Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Cordis, and Abbott Laboratories. The lawsuits are Saffran v. Boston Scientific, Saffran v. Johnson & Johnson, et. al., and Saffran v. Abbott Laboratories. Each lawsuit relates to …

Willfulness and enhancement vacated, but exceptionality finding affirmed

This opinion was superseded.  SRI International v. Cisco was decided on March 20, 2019 on appeal from the District of Delaware. The district court denied defendant Cisco’s motion for summary judgment of patent ineligibility and anticipation. At trial, the jury found willful infringement, and awarded plaintiff SRI a 3.5% reasonable royalty rate …

Attorney fees reversed because plaintiff was no longer the prevailing party

Imperium v. Samsung is a nonprecedential case decided on January 31, 2019 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. After a jury verdict against defendant Samsung, the district court concluded that plaintiff Imperium was entitled to attorney fees as a prevailing party. Samsung appealed. The Federal Circuit reversed the attorney fees …

Plaintiff did not intend to deceive the PTO in misdiscribing a figure

Barry v. Medtronic was decided on January 24, 2019 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. The jury found for plaintiff Barry and awarded $15,095,970 for domestic infringement of one patent and $2,625,210 for domestic infringement of another patent. After trial, the district court denied defendant Medtronic’s challenges regarding induced infringement, …

Fees for entire suit proper where plaintiff’s misconduct permeated the entire case

Large Audience Display v. Tennman is a nonprecedential case decided on August 20, 2018 on appeal from the Central District of California. After the PTO issued an IPR certificate cancelling all of Plaintiff Large Audience’s claims asserted in the district court, the district court dismissed the case with prejudice. On remand …

Implied waiver may result where patentee failed to disclose patent application to standard-setting organization

Core Wireless v. Apple was decided on August 16, 2018 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Both patents concern technology for wireless communication in a digital network. The jury found that defendant Apple infringed both plaintiff Core Wireless’s asserted claims. The district court then rejected Apple’s argument that one asserted patent was …