Forgery And Litigation Misconduct Doom Patent, Trigger Sanctions

2010-1149 Applied Materials v. Multimetrixs ND/CA 06-cv-7372 Judge Marilyn Hall Patel Defendants appeal from the orders of Judge Patel finding their patent, 6,831,287 unenforceable due to inequitable conduct before the PTO and then sanctioning them under § 285 and inherent powers.  The ’287 patent relates to a dual sensor design for vapor deposition processing of [...]

iLOR Must Pay Google’s Legal Fees For Baseless Lawsuit

2010-1117 iLOR v Google ED/KY 07-cv-109 Judge Joseph Hood iLOR appeals from the finding of Judge Joseph Hood that its suit against Google was baseless and "exceptional" under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and that it should pay over $650,000 for Google's legal fees, costs and expenses.

Qualcomm Sanctioned For Contempt Of Injunction

2009-1015 Broadcom v. QualcommCD/CA 05-467Judge James Selna Qualcomm appeals from the Order of Judge James Selna finding it in contempt of Court for failing to make certain Sunset Royalty Payments to Broadcom under the terms of the Permanent Injunction.  The royalties related to the Q-Chat technology and Broadcom's 6,389,010 patent. In September, the Federal Circuit [...]

Sanctions, Jail, Possible For Refusing Debtor’s Discovery

2009-1005 US Philips v. Int'l NorcentCD/CA 06-1366Judge Manuel Real Defendant Jennifer Long appeals from the order of Judge Manuel Real sanctioning her for refusing to comply with subpoena, court orders, and making false statements under oath.  This case is related to 2008-1385 (covered by us here) in which she appealed the jury's verdict finding her [...]

More Bulls Facing Tough Times

2008-1462 to 1465 Taurus IP v. DaimlerChryslerWD/WI 07-cv-158Judge Barbara Crabb Plaintiffs Taurus IP and Erich Spangenberg appeal from the judgment of Judge Barbara Crabb finding the 6,141,658 patent not infringed and certain claims invalid–a jury also found that plaintiffs breached a warranty from a prior settlement agreement.  Various other orders are involved, including one finding [...]

Updated In Brief: Qualcomm v. Broadcom

2007-1545, 2008-1162 Qualcomm v. BroadcomSD/CA 05-CV-1958Judge Rudi Brewster This is the appeal from case relating to the H.264 video compression standard resulting from the Joint Video Team, aka the case in which Qualcomm and its counsel were sanctioned.  We previously posted the Summary of the Arguments here, but now can provide copies of Qualcomm’s opening [...]

Disregarding Claim Construction Costs Medtronic Over $10 Million

2008-1401 Depuy Spinal v. Medtronic SofamorD/MA 01-CV-10165Judge Edward Harrington Medtronic appeals Judge Edward Harrington’s order awarding Depuy attorney’s fees under § 285 and sanctioning Medtronic $10 million under the court’s inherent powers. This case is related to appeal numbers 2008-1240 and 2008-1253 which cover the merits of the case.  The fee order was entered on [...]

Remote Access Computing Lawsuit Begets Real-Time Fee Award For Citrix

2008-1378 Orenshteyn v. Citrix SystemsSD/FL 02-CV-60478 Counsel for Orenshteyn have appealed Judge Adalberto Jordan’s Order granting Citrix’s motion for attorney fees.  Yes, you read that correctly–counsel.  In yet another joint and several attorneys fees sanction, Judge Jordan held that  Mr. Orenshteyn and his counsel are on the hook for over $750,000.  Considering that Mr. Orenshteyn [...]

In Brief: Qualcomm v. Broadcom

2007-1545, 2008-1162 Qualcomm v. BroadcomSD/CA 05-CV-1958Judge Rudi Brewster Qualcomm sued Broadcom for infringing 5,576,767 and 5,452,104 related to products compliant with the H.264 video compression standard, the result of a standard setting organization ("SSO"), the Joint Video Team (“JVT”).  Broadcom claimed that Qualcomm had waived its rights to enforce the patents by participating in the [...]

ResQNet and Lasna Split Infringement Judgment

2008-1365, 1366 ResQNet.com v. Lasna, Inc.SD/NY 01-cv-3578 Both parties appeal part of Judge Robert Sweet’s judgment following a bench trial on ResQNet’s two remaining patents.  The parties split infringement findings, with ResQNet being awarded approximately $400k (net after a $100k sanction against it and counsel under Rule 11). ResQNet sued Lasna on 5 patents related [...]