Cases: Intellectual Property

Indemnity/Intellectual Property/News: 3rd Circuit Reverses SJ Requiring Advancement Of Fees To Programmer Finding “Officer” Indemnity Language Ambiguous And District Judge Denies Linex’s Request To Defer Fee Ruling Under Patent Statute

Cases: Indemnity, Cases: Intellectual Property, In The News

Third Circuit Finds “Officer” Language To Be Ambiguous.      In Aleynikov v. The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., No. 13-4237 (3d Cir. Sept. 3, 2014) (precedential), a Goldman Sachs computer programmer with the title of “vice president” obtained a summary judgment ruling requiring Goldman Sachs to advance him attorney’s fees incurred in his defense of certain […]

Allocation/Intellectual Property/Reasonableness Of Fees: Plaintiff Prevailing On Trade Misappropriation Claim To The Tune Of $1,513,400 Also Entitled To Statutory Fees Of $3,297,102.50

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Published Part of Opinion on Fee Issues Focuses on Reasonable Hourly Rates in Court Venue.      Altavion, Inc. v. Konica Minolta Systems Laboratory Inc., Case Nos. A134343/A135831 (1st Dist., Div. 5 May 8, 2014) (partially published; fee discussion on hourly rates published but rest of fee discussion unpublished) dealt with both the merits of

Cases Under Review/Intellectual Property: SCOTUS Decides Companion Cases About The "Exceptional Case" Language In Patent Fee-Shifting Provision

Cases: Cases Under Review, Cases: Intellectual Property

  Octane Fitness Rejects Rigid Test For Determining What Is An "Exceptional Case," Giving Great Discretion to District Courts.      In Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 572 U.S. __, Case No. 12-1184 (U.S. Supreme Ct. Apr. 29, 2014), SCOTUS rejected a more rigid Federal Circuit test for determining what is an

Intellectual Property/Judgment Enforcement: Mandatory Fee Entitlement Statutes Garnered Fee Recovery For Prevailing Judgment Creditor In Misappropriation Of Likeness Case

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: Judgment Enforcement

  CCP § 685.040 Post-Enforcement Judgment Fees Are Allowable for Statutory and Contractual Fee Claims.      Appealing party was probably upset that she got hit with attorney’s fees under three mandatory fee-shifting statutes after prevailing, on the whole, and obtaining a $403,872.99 payment in satisfaction of judgment from defendant after obtaining some damages from a

IP/POOF!/SLAPP: A SLAPP Fee Award And Copyright Claim Dismissal Fee Recovery Go POOF!, While Another SLAPP Fee Award Of $248,506 Plus Fees On Fees Affirmed

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

Appealing Parties Could Not Surmount Abuse of Discretion Standard on Second SLAPP Fee Award.      In Graham-Sult v. Clainos, Case No. 11-16779 (9th Cir. Feb. 5, 2014) (published), one defendants obtained a SLAPP fee recovery of $126,431.50 (out of a requested $133,431.50) and a second group of defendants obtained a SLAPP fee recovery of $248,506

Intellectual Property/Prevailing Party: $111,993 To Prevailing Copyright Defendant Justified Under 17 U.S.C. § 505

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: Prevailing Party

  This One Involved a Copyright Fight Over a Hookah Water Container.       Costumed hookah smokers.  Matthew B. Brady, photographer.  Between 1850-60.  Library of Congress.      Inhale, Inc. v. Starbuzz Tobacco, Inc., Case No. 12-56331 (9th Cir. Jan. 9, 2014) (published)—great name for a case, isn’t it—was copyright litigation over plaintiff’s claim that it had

Intellectual Property/POOF!: Reversal Of Copyright Infringement Claims Dismissal Means Fee/Costs Awards Went POOF!

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: POOF!

  $134,243.25 in Fees/$3,819.95 in Costs Went Away.      Defendants prevailing on a successful motion to dismiss copyright infringement claims also requested $177,366.75 in fees (including $43,123.58 in “fees on fees”) and $3,819.95 in routine costs. The district judge awarded the defense $134,243.25 in fees and all of the requested fees based on a copyright

Intellectual Property (Copyright)/POOF!: $201,012.50 Fee Award Against Plaintiff Goes Away When Appellate Court Concludes Case Was Close And Plaintiff’s Suit Was Not Objectively Unreasonable

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: POOF!

  Simply Losing Fair Use Defense Did Not Means Fees Were Automatic.      Seltzer v. Green Day, Inc., Case No. 11-56573 (9th Cir. Aug. 7, 2013) (for publication) is a case where defendants’ win based on a fair use defense in a copyright infringement case was affirmed. However, the district court also awarded the defense

Scroll to Top