Tracking the landscape of patent remedies
 
NPE case not exceptional because plaintiff had good faith positions and did not delay in its litigation tactics

NPE case not exceptional because plaintiff had good faith positions and did not delay in its litigation tactics

Sarif Biomedical v. Brainlab is a nonprecedential case decided on March 21, 2018 on appeal from the District of Delaware. There were concurrent PTAB and district court litigations, but the PTAB litigation terminated before the district court litigation. Following claim construction adverse to plaintiff Sarif at the district court, the parties jointly stipulated to a final judgment of invalidity and noninfringement. The district court then denied defendant Brainlab’s motion for attorney fees, finding that “[Sarif] had a good faith, though ultimately incorrect, belief that its claims were not indefinite.” Brainlab appealed.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of attorney fees.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the case not exceptional. The district court found that “Sarif acted in good faith in part because, at each stage of the litigation, Sarif provided detailed arguments, grounded in the intrinsic evidence, in support of its proposed constructions and obtained expert opinion which supported its constructions.” The lower court’s ultimate disagreement with Sarif’s proposed construction does not render Sarif’s case substantively weak. Although Sarif modified its claim construction position from the PTAB to the district court, Sarif’s arguments in the district court were “not inconsistent with those it took before the PTAB.”

The district court did not err in rejecting the argument that Sarif’s litigation conduct was unreasonable. “It can be reasonable for a party to propose different constructions in PTAB and District Court proceedings, as the PTAB must give claims terms their ‘broadest reasonable construction,’ whereas District Courts give them the meaning they would have to a ‘person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.’” Despite that Sarif was a non-practicing entity and had alleged infringement against several other entities, Brainlab did not show that this was a nuisance suit. “Importantly, Sarif did not delay in its litigation tactics.” For example, Sarif decided not to pursue some claims in the trial court soon after the PTAB instituted and IPR of those claims. And Sarif stipulated to invalidity and noninfringement six days after the district court found certain claims indefinite.
Individuals can seek help from the browse for info order sildenafil Internet to increase awareness. You can levitra prices now find everything from spine strength testing to hydrotherapy from physiotherapy clinics. Premature Ejaculation is one of the most martinblaser.com cheapest viagra common male sexual dysfunctions, rapid climax or premature ejaculation (PE) affects a major section of male population all over the world. Numerous and simply having soul The sildenafil generic viagra American Psychiatric Association portrays clinical discouragement by time persevered.

 

Sarif Biomedical LLC v. Brainlab, Inc., 725 F. App’x 996 (Fed. Cir. 2018)