Stipulated dismissal with prejudice may form basis for attorney fees under Rule 54

Keith Manufacturing v. Butterfield was decided on April 7, 2020, on appeal from the District of Oregon. Plaintiff Keith Manufacturing brought a lawsuit against Defendant and former employee Butterfield after Butterfield filed a patent application. Keith alleged that the patent was based on inventions made during Butterfield’s employment and sought …

Summary judgement of noninfringement vacated because settlement agreement mooted the case

Serta Simmons Bedding v. Casper Sleep was decided on February 13, 2020 on appeal from the Southern District of New York. In September 2017, plaintiff Serta filed a patent infringement lawsuit against defendant Casper. While Casper’s motions for summary judgment of non-infringement were pending, the parties executed a settlement agreement. …

Balance of the harms disfavors injunction where movant does not show irreparable harm

LEGO v. ZURU is a nonprecedential case decided on January 15, 2020, on appeal from the District of Connecticut. Plaintiff LEGO filed a complaint against defendant ZURU for copyright, trademark, and patent infringement and obtained a temporary restraining order. After a hearing, the court granted LEGO’s motion for a preliminary …

Party’s misconduct must make the entire case exceptional to merit attorney fees

Intellectual Ventures I v. Trend Micro was decided on December 19, 2019 on appeal from the District of Delaware. In a related trial by plaintiff Intellectual Ventures against another defendant on the same patents, the jury found infringement of some claims and noninfringement of others. During that trial Intellectual Ventures’ …

Release payment for past infringement of standard essential patents is a jury question

TCL Communication v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson was decided on December 5, 2019 on appeal from the Central District of California. Following a bench trial, the district court determined that declaratory defendant Ericsson’s proposed offers were not “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory” (FRAND). “Over Ericsson’s repeated assertions of its jury trial right,” …

Declaratory jurisdiction existed where patentee sued the declaratory plaintiff’s customer

UCP v. Balsam is a nonprecedential case decided on September 19, 2019 and unsealed on October 7, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Balsam sued Frontgate (a third party) alleging infringement of certain patents. After the claim construction order, the parties settled, whereby Frontgate agreed to stop purchasing the relevant product …

Judgment vacated and “pending” case remanded for dismissal after unpatentability at the PTAB

Chrimar Systems v. ALE U.S. is a nonprecedential case decided on September 19, 2019 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. After a jury trial returned a verdict against defendant ALE in a case involving four patents, the district court entered a judgment awarding plaintiff Chrimar damages and post-verdict ongoing royalties. …

Injunction, enhanced damages, and attorney fees vacated after finding one patent invalid under Section 101

Chamberlain Group v. Techtronic Industries was decided on August 21, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of Illinois. After the jury found plaintiff Chamberlain’s patents infringed and not invalid, the district court the district court granted an injunction, enhanced damages and attorney fees. The district court denied defendant Techtronic’s motion for JMOL …

Damages available for products in amended complaint that relate back to the originally accused products

Anza Tech. v. Mushkin was decided on August 16, 2019 on appeal from the District of Colorado. Plaintiff Anza filed this action in March 2017 against Defendant Mushkin in the Eastern District of California. In September 2017, Anza filed its first amended complaint, which joined Avant as a co-defendant. The …

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 …