“Awards of enhanced damages are not to be meted out in a typical infringement case, but are instead designed as a punitive or vindictive sanction for egregious infringement behavior.” WCM v. IPS. There is “no requirement that enhanced damages must follow a finding of egregious misconduct.” Id. Rather, “courts should continue to take into account the particular circumstances of …
Large Audience Display v. Tennman is a nonprecedential case decided on August 20, 2018 on appeal from the Central District of California. After the PTO issued an IPR certificate cancelling all of Plaintiff Large Audience’s claims asserted in the district court, the district court dismissed the case with prejudice. On remand …
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 …
Nantkwest v. Iancu was decided en banc on July 27, 2018 on appeal from the Eastern District of Virginia. The USPTO rejected Nantkwest’s patent application on obviousness grounds. The PTAB affirmed the rejection, and Nantkwest appealed to the district court under 35 U.S.C. § 145. After prevailing at the district court, the …
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, …
Federal Rule of Evidence 702 provides that an expert witness may testify if he or she ” is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” Under Daubert v. Merrell Dow and Rule 702, courts are charged with a gatekeeping role, the objective of which is to ensure that expert testimony admitted into evidence is …
To obtain a preliminary injunction, a plaintiff must show that it is likely to succeed on the merits, that it is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of the hardships tips in its favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest. The …
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 …
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 …
This opinion was superseded. Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor was decided on July 3, 2018 on appeal from the Northern District of California. The asserted patents related to switching regulators involved in power supply controller chips. A jury found infringement and awarded $139.8 million in reasonable royalties to plaintiff Power Integration based on …