This week in AdjustaCam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., __ F.3d __, 2017 WL 2854387 (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2017)(Reyna, J.), the Federal Circuit bluntly remanded a patent infringement case to the Texas trial court to grant an award of attorney fees against the patentee in favor of the accused infringer.  A snipped from the opinion is attached which gives the flavor of the proceedings.


From the opinion:  “The district court abused its discretion failing to follow our mandate to evaluate the totality of the circumstances under Octane in the first instance. Moreover, [patentee] AdjustaCam filed a weak infringement case against [accused infringer] Newegg that became objectively baseless after the district court’s Markman order. The district court’s determination that AdjustaCam could reasonably argue infringement post-Markman is based on clearly erroneous fact-findings. AdjustaCam also unreasonably litigated the case by repeatedly serving expert reports and declarations at the last minute. The pattern of low and erratic settlements, though not determinative, reinforces a conclusion of unreasonableness. The district court’s conclusion that AdjustaCam reasonably litigated this case was clearly erroneous. Based on the totality of these case-specific circumstances, we hold that the district court abused its discretion in denying Newegg’s motion for fees.”

Comments are closed.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can
take care of it!

Visit our friends!

A few highly recommended friends...