Invalidity opinion of counsel is relevant but not dispositive in willfulness inquiry

C. R. Bard v. AngioDynamics was decided on November 10, 2020, on appeal from the District of Delaware. Partway through the jury trial, the district court granted Defendant AngioDynamics JMOL that Plaintiff Bard’s asserted claims were not infringed, were not willfully infringed, and were invalid as directed to ineligible subject …

Plaintiff cannot recover pre-suit damages because of unmarked licensee products

Packet Intelligence v. NetScout was decided on July 14, 2020, on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. Plaintiff Packet Intelligence sued Defendant NetScout on two method-claims patents and one apparatus-claims patent. The jury found all claims willfully infringed, rejected NetScout’s invalidity defenses under § 102, awarded $3.5 million in …

Assignor estoppel bars assignor from challenging patent validity at the district court but not the PTAB

Hologic v. Minerva Surgical was decided on April 22, 2020 on appeal from the District of Delaware. A named inventor of the eventual asserted patents (the ‘183 and the ‘348) assigned his rights to the relevant patent applications to a company that would later be acquired by plaintiff Hologic. Years …

Marking statute limits damages even after the sale of unmarked product ceases

Artic Cat v. Bombadier Recreational was decided on February 19, 2020 on appeal from the Southern District of Florida. Plaintiff Artic Cat entered into a license agreement with a third party, which “expressly stated that [the third party] had no marking obligations.” Thereafter, the third party began making and selling …

Denial of summary judgment of invalidity does not conclusively show objective reasonableness regarding fees

Eko Brands v. Adrian Rivera Maynez was decided on January 13, 2020, on appeal from the Western District of Washington. Plaintiff Eko filed a declaratory judgment and an infringement action against defendant ARM. On summary judgment, the district court granted Eko declaratory judgment of noninfringement but denied the motion as …

A patent litigation remedies profile of the District of Massachusetts

This post will organize various patent litigation decisions from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (D. Mass.). The focus will be on patent infringement remedies, particularly damages and injunctions.   Local Patent Rules   Patent Jury Verdicts: Below are the patent jury verdicts from the District of Massachusetts …

A patent litigation remedies profile of the District of New Jersey

This post will organize various patent litigation decisions from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.N.J.). The focus will be on patent infringement remedies, particularly damages and injunctions.   Local Patent Rules   Patent Jury Verdicts: Below are the patent jury verdicts from the  District of …

A patent litigation remedies profile of the Northern District of Illinois

This post will organize various patent litigation decisions from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (N.D. Ill.). The focus will be on patent infringement remedies, particularly damages and injunctions.   Local Patent Rules   Patent Jury Verdicts: Below are the patent jury verdicts from the Northern …

A patent litigation remedies profile of the Central District of California

This post will organize various patent litigation decisions from the United States District Court for the Central District of California (C.D. Cal.). The focus will be on patent infringement remedies, particularly damages and injunctions.   Local Patent Rules (Judge Andrew J. Guilford) Local Patent Rules (Judge Otis D. Wright II)   …

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 …