Essential Patent Blog

Essential Patent Blog

The Source for Standard-Essential and Other Patent Litigation Issues

Category Archives: Court Orders

Subscribe to Court Orders RSS Feed

N.D. Cal. excludes expert damages testimony that based royalty rate on patents’ hold-up value

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
With standard-essential-patent (SEP) damages discussions frequently focused on how to calculate a RAND rate, one can sometimes forget that not all SEPs are subject to [F]RAND obligations, which raises the issue whether and to what extent a reasonable royalty rate would be different between RAND and non-RAND encumbered patents. Last week, N.D. Cal. Judge Lucy Koh issued a … Continue Reading

Back to state court: Vermont’s unfair competition suit premised solely on state law

Posted in Court Orders, Legislation, Non-Practicing Entities
After being removed to federal district court last May, the Vermont Attorney General’s suit against non-practicing entity MPHJ is being sent back to state court. The decision holds that the AG’s unfair competition claims arising from MPHJ’s patent enforcement efforts belong in state court and raises the question of whether other patent demand letter jurisprudence will … Continue Reading

Infringement contentions identifying technical standards are insufficient to identify specific products-at-sssue under N.D. Cal. Patent Local Rules

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
As the Senate continues to weigh patent reform measures focused on improving preliminary disclosures in patent litigation, courts continue to distinguish between sufficient and insufficient disclosures under their own patent local rules. According to a recent ruling from the Northern District of California, a generalized claim that any products practicing a technical standard infringe an asserted … Continue Reading

Judge Whyte schedules permanent injunction and post-trial motion hearing (Realtek v. LSI)

Posted in Appeals, Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
Yesterday Judge Whyte entered a post-trial scheduling order setting briefing and hearing dates for post-trial motions as well as Realtek’s request to permanently enjoin LSI “from enforcing, or seeking to enforce, any exclusion order or injunction that Defendants [LSI] might obtain with regard with regard to the ’958 and ’856 patents [LSI's WiFi SEPs at … Continue Reading

Judge Koh dismisses without prejudice Samsung’s standard essential patents and Apple’s related FRAND defenses (5:12-cv-630)

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
Judge Koh recently granted Apple and Samsung’s stipulated request to dismiss without prejudice Samsung’s claims that Apple infringes certain declared-standard essential patents (SEPs) and Apple’s related FRAND defenses and counterclaims.  There is no indication in the filing that the parties are negotiating a settlement as to those SEPs, though that’s always a possibility.  The stipulation does … Continue Reading

Patent Case: Federal Circuit denies mandamus in two cases seeking transfer of patent assertion entity cases

Posted in Appeals, Court Orders, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities, Patent Alerts
Yesterday, in two separate precedential decisions on mandamus, the Federal Circuit refused to overturn the district courts’ decisions not to transfer patent assertion entity cases to the defendants’ home forum: In re Apple, Misc. 13-156 (mandamus from E.D. Tex.) and In re Barnes Noble, Misc. 13-162 (mandamus from W.D. Tenn.).  Both mandamus orders were decided by the … Continue Reading

Judge Enjoins Nebraska AG from Enforcing Cease and Desist Order Against Alleged Patent Assertion Entity

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities
Last week, District of Nebraska judge Joseph F. Bataillon entered an order preliminarily enjoining the Nebraska Attorney General (AG) from enforcing a cease and desist order that would prevent or impede the law firm of Farney Daniels from representing patent assertion entity MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC (MPHJ) to license or litigate MPHJ’s U.S. patents with respect … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rules that Burden to Show Infringement in Declaratory Judgment Action for Non-Infringement Remains with Patentee

Posted in Appeals, Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Medtronic, Inv. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC, unanimously reversing the Federal Circuit’s decision below and resolving two issues that are commonly disputed in the lower courts.  First, the Court held that the Federal Circuit had subject-matter jurisdiction over an appeal of an action for a declaratory judgment for … Continue Reading

Demand letter with laundry list of standard essential patents does not provide actual notice or knowledge of infringement

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation, Uncategorized
On New Year’s Eve, Magistrate Judge Stephen Crocker of the W.D. Wis. ruled that a patent pool’s demand letter listing hundreds of standard-essential-patents was not enough for the patent owner to provide its recipients with actual notice of alleged acts of patent infringement under the patent statute.  Ruling on Defendants’ Motion for JMOL regarding pre-suit damages in the ongoing Toshiba … Continue Reading

Update: Judge Whyte finalizes Daubert and evidentiary rulings framing RAND issues for Realtek v. LSI jury trial

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Uncategorized
Judge Whyte recently issued his final ruling on Daubert and other evidence regarding RAND issues for the upcoming Realtek v. LSI jury trial based on his tentative ruling discussed in our Nov. 14 post.  Judge Whyte basically kept his tentative rulings and bases thereof, as discussed in our prior post.  He did provide additional insight into … Continue Reading

Judge Stark bifurcates Blu-ray SEP case to determine essentiality and FRAND rate before liability issues (One Blue v. Imitation, D. Del. 1:13-cv-917)

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
Yesterday Judge Stark followed an approach used by Judge Holdeman in the Innovatio WiFi case by bifurcating FRAND issues from liability where essentiality and a RAND royalty rate will be tried first in hopes the result will spur settlement, followed by discovery and trial on liability issues if still necessary.  Recall that this case arose … Continue Reading

Judge Whyte’s Daubert and evidentiary rulings frame RAND issues for Realtek v. LSI jury trial

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation, Uncategorized
Yesterday Judge Whyte issued an Order with tentative rulings on motion’s in limine and Daubert motions for the upcoming Realtek v. LSI trial where the jury will determine (1) a RAND rate, (2) damages based on the court’s prior ruling that LSI breached its RAND obligations by seeking an exclusion order at the ITC before offering Realtek … Continue Reading

Motorola appeals to Federal Circuit Judge Robart’s Rule 54(b) judgment on RAND issues

Posted in Appeals, Court Orders, District Courts, Jury verdicts, Litigation, Uncategorized
Today Judge Robart issued an Order certifying a Rule 54(b) judgment in the Microsoft v. Motorola case where he had issued a first of its kind RAND rate ruling on Motorola H.264 and 802.11 standard essential patents (SEPs) and sustained the jury verdict that Motorola breached its RAND obligations in offering a license to Microsoft.  Motorola promptly filed … Continue Reading

Reminder/Correction: Complimentary Webinar Thu. Noon on Lessons Learned From Litigated Royalty Rates on Standard Essential Patents

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities, Uncategorized, Webinar
Reminder (and correcting some email notices) that the Essential Patent Blog and Kelley Drye & Warren LLP will host a complimentary webinar on Thursday, Oct. 17 at 12pm Eastern to discuss the import of Judge Holderman’s Oct. 3 RAND opinion in the Innovatio IP Ventures Patent Litigation and comparison with Judge Robart’s RAND methodology from the Microsoft v. Motorola litigation.  Some … Continue Reading

Court Precludes Defendants From Raising FRAND Obligation After Dropping That Affirmative Defense

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation, Uncategorized
The Court presiding over Wi-LAN’s patent infringement litigation against HTC and Exedea recently entered an order memorializing the court’s oral rulings on various pre-trial motions and disputes during a September 26, 2013 pre-trial hearing, including whether Wi-LAN’s alleged failure to offer a license on FRAND terms remained an issue in the case after defendants voluntarily withdrew … Continue Reading

Complimentary Webinar: Lessons Learned From Litigated Royalty Rates on Standard Essential Patents

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities, Uncategorized, Webinar
Please join the Essential Patent Blog and Kelley Drye & Warren LLP for a complimentary webinar on Thursday, Oct. 17 at 12:00pm Eastern to discuss the import of Judge Holderman’s recent RAND decision in the In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC Patent Litigation.  Judge Holderman’s October 3rd decision is only the second U.S. district court … Continue Reading

PUBLIC version of Judge Holderman’s RAND determination in Innovatio WiFi SEP litigation

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities, Uncategorized
Today the court posted the public version of Judge Holderman’s 89-page ruling on what constitutes RAND for Innovatio’s WiFi patents — posted much sooner than anticipated in our earlier post.  The court applied a modified version of Judge Robart’s methodology to determine the RAND rate to be paid by manufacturers of WiFi equipment for nineteen of Innovatio’s … Continue Reading

Judge Robart rules sufficient evidence supports jury verdict that Motorola breached RAND obligation in dealings with Microsoft

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Jury verdicts, Litigation
Yesterday, Judge Robart issued an Order that denied Motorola’s motion to overturn the jury’s verdict that Motorola breached its RAND obligations in dealing with Microsoft on standard essential patents (SEPs) for IEEE 802.11 WiFi standards and ITU H.264 video compression standards. Judge Robart’s ruling here indicates that assessing compliance with a RAND obligation is a case-sensitive, … Continue Reading

International Trade Commission to fully review decision finding no violation of Section 337 in InterDigital 3G patent case

Posted in Court Orders, International Trade Commission, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities
Today, the U.S. International Trade Commission issued its delayed decision on whether it would review ALJ David P. Shaw’s Initial Determination finding no violation of Section 337 in In the Matter of Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-800.  (For some background, see our previous post on the ALJ’s Initial … Continue Reading

Two weeks ahead of Microsoft-Motorola jury trial, summary judgment ruling reduces the issues (but only a little bit)

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
A month ago, we discussed how Microsoft and Motorola filed dueling summary judgment motions in an attempt to eliminate some of the issues from the upcoming RAND breach of contract jury trial in Seattle (currently set to begin August 26).  Judge James L. Robart held an oral argument on July 31, and this morning, his … Continue Reading

Rebutting Judge Robart? E.D. Tex. Judge Leonard Davis upholds jury damages award on WiFi SEPs, dismisses RAND-related issues (Ericsson v. D-Link)

Posted in Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
Back in June, we alerted you to a jury verdict handed down in a patent case in the Eastern District of Texas, where the jury awarded Ericsson several million dollars as compensation for infringement of several of its 802.11-essential patents by several manufacturers of WiFi-compliant products and components.  At the time, we noted that the … Continue Reading

ITC issues public version of recommended determination on remedy and bonding in InterDigital 3G patent case (Inv. No. 337-TA-800)

Posted in Court Orders, International Trade Commission, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities
Earlier this week, the ITC issued the public version of ALJ David P. Shaw’s Initial Determination finding no violation of Section 337 in in In the Matter of Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-800 – the ITC’s investigation into InterDigital’s accusations that Huawei, Nokia, and ZTE infringed several 3G-essential InterDigital patents.  But … Continue Reading

Chipmakers LSI and Agere get a partial preliminary win at the ITC, but not on SEP infringement (Inv. No. 337-TA-837)

Posted in Court Orders, International Trade Commission, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities
Yesterday, Administrative Law Judge David P. Shaw issued a Notice of Initial Determination in In the Matter of Certain Audiovisual Components and Products Containing Same (No. 337-TA-837), an ITC Section 337 investigation based on an infringement complaint brought by LSI and Agere against Funai, Realtek, and Mediatek (who had previously settled out of the case). … Continue Reading

ITC judge rejects Ericsson’s attempt to add FRAND defenses to Adaptix Section 337 case (337-TA-871)

Posted in Court Orders, International Trade Commission, Litigation, Non-Practicing Entities
Back in January, we alerted you to a patent infringement case brought in the U.S. International Trade Commission by Acacia Research subsidiary Adaptix.  Adaptix accused Ericsson of infringing U.S. Pat. No. 6,870,808, which Adaptix asserted to be essential to the ETSI 4G Long-Term Evolution (LTE) wireless standard.  The ITC later instituted the investigation as In the Matter … Continue Reading
.