Tracking the landscape of patent remedies
 
Party waived right to challenge finding of no willfulness despite change in law

Party waived right to challenge finding of no willfulness despite change in law

Ultratec v. Sorenson is a nonprecedential case decided on May 18, 2018 on appeal from the Western District of Wisconsin. The jury awarded plaintiff Ultratec a “total royalty payment of approximately $5,443,485.” The district court concluded on JMOL that there was no willfulness because plaintiff could not meet the objective prong of Seagate, that certain claims were invalid as obvious, and that defendant Sorenson was not entitled to a new trial on damages. Both parties appealed.

The Federal Circuit reversed the judgment of obviousness, affirmed the judgment of no willfulness, and affirmed the denial of a new trial.

Despite that Halo rejected Seagate’s objective prong, and was decided after the district court’s judgment of no willfulness, Ultratec “waived its right to appeal this issue by failing to raise it in the district court.” “[W]hen there is a relevant change in the law before entry of final judgment, a party generally must notify the district court; if the party fails to do so, it waives arguments on appeal that are based on that change in the law.” The Federal Circuit thus found the issue waived, and affirmed the district court judgment of no willfulness.

Substantial evidence supported the jury damages award. The asserted patent was “directed to assisting individuals with hearing impairment communicate over a telephone network.” Ultratec contended that Sorenson infringed “by providing captioned telephone services using their captioned telephone devices.” “The jury came to its per-minute running royalty amount by first finding the royalty rate (three cents), then finding the total number of infringing minutes (181,449,487 minutes), and finally, by multiplying those two numbers.” (parenthesis in original). The Federal Circuit rejected Sorenson’s challenge to the number of infringing minutes. The jury could reasonably infer from the testimony heard, and the other evidence of record, that “a significant majority of the calls infringed.” Moreover, “Sorenson did not offer any rebuttal evidence on the number of infringing minutes.”
These can be purchased in the 100mg sachets from the medicinal drugstores & also from the clinical websites at viagra pills in india reasonable fares. We also discuss how Generic http://www.learningworksca.org/linda-collins-2/ purchase cheap cialis can help a men find some relief from the woes of ED. Both of the medicine increase the blood circulation in buy generic levitra the muscles makes them more relaxed that helps to perform the course of coitus and ultimately keeps his partner sexually unhappy. It decreases the stress on the right ventricle of the heart and through the vessels that lead to the lungs and reduces chronic cough cialis 25mg Reproductive system: Few herbal aphrodisiac preparations contain guduchi as their ingredient.

 

Ultratec, Inc. v. Sorenson Communs., Inc., 733 F. App’x 535 (Fed. Cir. 2018)