Cases: Intellectual Property

Intellectual Property: Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals Decides That Defense Not Entitled To “Prevailing Party” Status Under Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act Where Plaintiff Dismissed Federal Suit Without Prejudice And Refiled In State Court

Cases: Intellectual Property

18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(D) Fee-Shifting Statute Was At Issue.             Dunster Live LLC v. Lonestar Logos Management Co., LLC, 908 F.3d 948 (5th Cir. 2018) was a situation where a plaintiff filed a trade secret misappropriation suit in federal court under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). After it lost an injunction, plaintiff moved to […]

Intellectual Property, Preemption, Prevailing Party: Defendants’ Prevailing On Preemption Claim Under State Statute With Mandatory Fees Clause Was Entitled To Appellate Fees For The Win

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: Preemption, Cases: Prevailing Party

Even Though A Few Sliver Claims Remained, Defendants Prevailed Because Those Claims Are Not Subject To Fee Shifting.             The Ninth Circuit, in an earlier appeal, had decided that plaintiffs’ claims for resale royalties under the California Resale Royalties Act (CRRA) largely were preempted by the 1976 Copyright Act for any claims occurring after January

Cases Under Review, Intellectual Property: SCOTUS Will Decide Whether “Full Costs” To Prevailing Party In Copyright Case Is Limited To Taxable Costs Or Non-Taxable Costs

Cases: Cases Under Review, Cases: Intellectual Property

Case Will Resolve Split Among 8th, 9th, and 11th Circuits.             On Thursday, September 27, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Rimini Street Inc. v. Oracle USA Inc., No. 17-1625 (U.S. Sept. 27, 2018, cert. granted from Ninth Circuit opinion).   Here is the issue to be decided, one resolving a split between the

Intellectual Property: Fees/Costs Award To Prevailing Defendant Affirmed By Ninth Circuit In BitTorrent Network Direct and Contributory Copyright Suit Dismissed By Plaintiff After It Became Clear No Case Could Be Alleged

Cases: Intellectual Property

Case Was Exceptional Because Plaintiff Had No Proof Defendant Was The Infringer.             In Cobbler Nevada, LLC v. Gonzales, No. 17-35041 (9th Cir. Aug. 28, 2018) (published), plaintiff sued a defendant registered IP address for direct and contributory copyright infringement based on allegations the address was an infringer for unauthorized downloading and distribution of the

Intellectual Property: Federal Circuit Vacates More Than $51 Million Fee Award Against Unsuccessful Patent Infringement Plaintiffs Because The Award Failed To Analyze A Connection Between The Fees Awarded As Measured Against Plaintiffs’ Misconduct

Cases: Intellectual Property

Some Causal Nexus Required To Keep Patent-Shifting Fee Awards Compensatory, Rather Than Punitive, In Nature.             In re Rembrandt Technologies LP Patent Litig., No. 2017-1784 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 15, 2018) (precedential) involved a situation where patent infringement plaintiffs lost their claims against dozens of defendants (mainly cable companies, cable equipment manufacturers, and broadcast networks) relating

Intellectual Property: Federal Circuit, In Divided En Banc Decision, Decides That Disappointed Patent Applicant Under Patent Act § 145 Does Not Have To Pay Attorney’s Fees In Order To Challenge Examiner Rejection In District Court

Cases: Intellectual Property

Majority Found No Overt Congressional Expression To Cover Fees, While Dissenting Faction Found “Expenses” Meant All Expenses Inclusive Of Attorney’s Fees.             In Nantkwest, Inc. v. Iancu, 2016-1794 (Fed. Cir., en banc, July 27, 2018) (precedential), the Federal Circuit considered the question of whether attorney’s fees were recoverable under a federal statute applicable to “all

Intellectual Property: Ninth Circuit Reverses Oregon Magistrate Judge’s Denial Of Attorney’s Fees To Successful Copyright Plaintiff In Peer-To-Peer Networks Involving BitTorrent Users

Cases: Intellectual Property

Magistrate Judge Improperly Analyzed Fogerty Factors, Putting Improper Emphasis On General Dislike of BitTorret Litigation In General And On Conduct Of Plaintiff’s Counsel In Other Cases.        Evolving technology has always presented interesting new developments to intellectual property law given that it did not necessarily see how technology will impact protected uses. One of the

Intellectual Property: Ninth Circuit Affirms $314,669.75 Fee Award And $3,825.15 Cost Award In Favor Of Successful Defendants In Copyright Infringement Case

Cases: Intellectual Property

Case Involved Allegations That Defendants Copied Screenplay From Plaintiff In Connection With The Film “Walk Of Shame.”             Shame On You Productions, Inc. (SOYP) v. Banks, No. 16-55024 (9th Cir. June 21, 2018) (published) involved awards of $314,669.75 in attorney’s fees and of $3,825.15 in costs to defendants under the federal copyright fee-shifting statute (17

Intellectual Property: Fourth Circuit Court Of Appeals Determine Preponderance Of Evidence Burden Of Proof Governs And No Need To Show Bad Faith In “Exceptional” Lanham Act Cases For Purposes Of Fee Shifting

Cases: Intellectual Property

Fourth Circuit Joins Fifth And Ninth Circuits On Preponderance of Evidence Burden Of Proof.             In Verisign Incorporated v. XYZ.COM, LLC, No. 17-1704 (4th Cir. May 29, 2018) (published), the Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded an attorney’s fees denial order in a Lanham Act case. In doing so, the federal appeals court decided: (1) the

Intellectual Property: D.N.J. Fed. Court Awards $13.8M In Attorney’s Fees And Costs To Defendant Zimmer Inc. In 13-Yr. Patent Infringement Battle With Howmedica Osteonics, Finding That The Matter Was “Exceptional” Under Patent Fee-Shifting Statute

Cases: Intellectual Property

District Judge Sustained $990 Hourly Rates As Reasonable For Some Senior Defense Attorneys With Large U.S. Firms.             On May 23, 2018, U.S. District Judge William Walls (D.N.J.) unsealed a 39-page decision by which he articulated reasons for awarding defendant Zimmer Corp. $13,296,559 (out of a requested $13.5 million) in attorney’s fees and $513,258 (the

Scroll to Top