Cases: Intellectual Property

Intellectual Property:  Zazzle Dodges Plaintiff’s Request For Attorney’s Fees After It Lost Copyright Infringement Dispute Over Paintings

Cases: Intellectual Property

$715,833.25 Base Lodestar Request By Plaintiff Was At Issue Where $351,100 Compensatory Award And Permanent Injunction Were The Result In The Case.             In Greg Young Publishers, Inc. v. Zazzle Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-04587-SVW (KSx) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2018), U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson denied a request by plaintiff for an award of […]

Costs/Intellectual Property:  Ninth Circuit, In 2-1 Opinion, Affirms Denial Of Costs To Successful Defendants/Counterclaimants And Apportionment Of Costs Between Two Sides In Well-Publicized Case Involving Copyright Infringement Dispute

Cases: Costs, Cases: Intellectual Property

Dispute Involved Pharrell Williams’ “Blurred Lines” And Marvin Gaye’s “Got To Give It Up.”             The Ninth Circuit in Williams v. Gaye, Case Nos. 15-56880 et al. (9th Cir. Mar. 21, 2018) (published) faced having to resolve an appeal of the case by which Pharrell Williams’ 2013 song “Blurred Lines” was found to have infringed

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY:  Ninth Circuit Reverses, Vacates, And Remands Fee And Costs Awards In Favor Of Oracle On Copyright Infringement/Supplemental Claims Relating To Different Results On Appeal

Cases: Intellectual Property

Significant Non-Taxable Costs Under Copyright Statute Sustained Based On District Court Discretion Under 17 U.S.C. § 505.              The Ninth Circuit, in Oracle USA, Inc. v. Rimini Street, Inc., Nos. 16-16832/16-16905 (9th Cir. Jan. 8, 2018) (published) had to deal with a contentious intellectual property battle in which the district court entered significant merits, fees,

Intellectual Property:  Federal Circuit Agrees That Octane Fitness Standards Apply To Determining “Exceptional” Fee Awards Under Lanham Act

Cases: Intellectual Property

Federal Circuit Is Aligned With Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits On This Issue.             In our October 24, 2016 post, we discussed the Ninth Circuit’s decision in SunEarth, Inc. v. Sun Earth Solar Power Co., 839 F.3d 1179 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2016) (per curiam), which held that attorney’s fees awards under Lanham Act’s “exceptional”

Intellectual Property:  Federal Circuit Affirms $1.6 Million Fee Award To Defense In Octane Fitness Case

Cases: Intellectual Property

Fee Award Sustained Following Oft-Quoted SCOTUS Decision.             Likely the final chapter has been closed on the fee battle in the case which produced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S.Ct. 1749, 1756, 1758 (2014), defining the flexibility given district judges to decide whether a

Intellectual Property:  Federal Circuit Determines That No Jury Trial Right Attaches To Awarding Attorney’s Fees Under Patent Act

Cases: Intellectual Property

Fees Are An Equitable Remedy, Left For Court Determination.             In AIA America, Inc. v. Avid Radiopharmaceuticals, No. 2016-2647 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 10, 2017) (published) (Hughes, J.), a district judge awarded a prevailing defendant over $3.9 million in attorney’s fees under Section 285 of the Patent Act (35 U.S.C. § 285).  Plaintiff appealed, claiming this

Intellectual Property: $5,213,117.06 In Attorney’s Fees To Winning Defendants In Copyright Infringement Case Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Intellectual Property

  Defendants Beating Copyright Infringement Actions Also Vindicate Purposes Of The Copyright Act, But Supplemental Fee Request Found Untimely.      In Perfect 10, Inc. v. Giganews, Inc., Case No. 15-55500 (9th Cir. Jan. 23, 2017) (published), defendants won summary judgments in a copyright infringement action involving Usenet, an international collection of organizations and individuals whose

Intellectual Property: En Banc Ninth Circuit Agrees That Lanham Act “Exceptional” Cases For Fee Recovery Purposes Tracks Patent Analysis For Fee Recovery Articulated In Octane Fitness

Cases: Intellectual Property

  Also Agrees That Appellate Review Of Lanham Fee Award By District Judge Is Under Abuse Of Discretion Standard.     In an en banc, per curiam opinion, the Ninth Circuit in SunEarth, Inc. v. Sun Earth Solar Power Co., Nos. 13-17622/15-16096 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2016) (published), decided that attorney’s fees awardable under the Lanham

Intellectual Property: Copyright Infringement Fees/Costs To Winner Almost Equaled Compensatory Infringement Verdict

Cases: Intellectual Property

  Prelitigation Destruction of Evidence May Have Pushed Case Over For Fee Recovery.      U.S. District Judge Larry R. Hicks (D. Nev.) recently awarded Oracle USA Inc. $46.2 million in costs and attorney’s fees under a copyright fee-shifting statute in a case where Oracle won a $50 million jury verdict against Rimini Street Inc. He

Intellectual Property: SCOTUS Clarifies Factors For Discretion In Awarding Fees Under Copyright Act’s Fee-Shifting Statute

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  17 U.S.C. § 505 Was At Issue—Objective Reasonableness Plus Other Factors Should Be Weighed.     Justice Kagan, for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, clarified the factors to be weighed for purposes of discretionarily awarding attorney’s fees to a prevailing party under 17 U.S.C. § 505, the Copyright Act’s fee-shifting statute.     In Kirtsaeng dba

Scroll to Top