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 …

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, …

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This opinion was superseded.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 …

Preliminary injunction vacated due to erroneous construction of asserted claims

Indivior v. Dr. Reddy’s is a nonprecedential case decided on November 20, 2018 on appeal from the District of New Jersey. In the first ANDA case, plaintiff Indivior sued defendant Dr. Reddy’s, alleging infringement. The district court found that Dr. Reddy’s ANDA did not infringe the asserted patent. After the judgment …

Lump-sum royalty covering products not accused to be infringing is vacated

Enplas Display v. Seoul Semiconductor was decided on November 19, 2018 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Declaratory plaintiff Enplas filed an declaratory action against declaratory defendant Seoul Semiconductor on two patents. Seoul Semiconductor counterclaimed, asserting infringement and seeking damages. On summary judgment, the district court held that no reasonable juror could …

Entire market value rule inappropriate where accused product has valuable non-patented features – modified opinion –

Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor was originally decided on July 3, 2018, and modified on September 20, 2018 on appeal from the Northern District of California. In the modified opinion, language requiring that the patentee, to apply to entire market value rule, present evidence that the other features “are not relevant to consumer choice” and “did not …

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 …

It was error to award all requested fees without causal connection between the misconduct and the award

Rembrandt v. Comcast was decided on July 27, 2018 on appeal from the District of Delaware. After several years of litigation by plaintiff Rembrandt “against dozens of cable companies, cable equipment manufacturers, and broadcast networks,” the district court “entered final judgment against Rembrandt as to all claims.” After an adverse claim construction, …

Enhancement vacated because district court did not sufficiently consider the closeness of the case

Polara v. Campbell was decided on July 10, 2018 on appeal from the Central District of California. The jury entered a verdict that the asserted claims were not invalid and that defendant Campbell willfully infringed the claims. After trial, the district court enhanced damages by 2.5, denied Campbell’s motion for JMOL …

Denial of permanent injunction vacated because willingness to license does not necessarily mean no irreparable harm – modified opinion –

Texas Advanced Optoelectronic v. Renesas was decided on July 9, 2018 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. The Federal Circuit granted petition for rehearing and reissued the opinion, modifying the opinion released on May 1, 2018. The principal change relates to the evidence relied on by Texas Advanced in its …