By Memorandum Opinion entered on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in SRI International, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Case 20-1685 (Fed. Cir.
Continue Reading Federal Circuit Clarifies Standards for Willful Infringement and Enhanced Damages While Reinstating, Affirming-in-Part and Reversing-in-Part Findings and Awards Below by the District of Delaware in Patent Infringement Action

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in Dynamic Data Technologies, LLC v. Brightcove Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 19-1190-CFC (D.Del. July 20, 2020), the
Continue Reading Judge Connolly Grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Patent Infringement Claims in Part and Denies in Part

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in Boston Scientific Corp. et al. v. Nevro Corp., Civil Action No. 18-0644-CFC (D.Del. November 25, 2019), the Court
Continue Reading Judge Connolly Grants Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Eight Counts of Plaintiffs’ Direct Infringement Claims for Failure to Satisfy Iqbal/Twombly Pleading Standard

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Nox Medical EHF v. Natus Neuorology Inc., Civil Action No. 15-709-RGA (D.Del. December 7, 2018), the Court granted
Continue Reading Judge Andrews Grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration But Denies Plaintiff’s Post-Trial Motion for Enhanced Damages After Reconsideration

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Vehicle IP, LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, et al., Civil Action No. 09-1007-LPS (D.Del., December 30, 2016), the
Continue Reading Chief Judge Stark Grants Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of No Willful Infringement

By Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 04-1371-LPS (D.Del., January 18, 2011), the Court granted in part and denied in part the post-trial motion of the prevailing Plaintiff, Power Integrations, Inc. (“Power”), to declare the case exceptional and to award Power treble damages and its attorneys’ fees. Specifically, the Court granted Power’s motion for enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 to the extent that it enhanced Power’s damages two times (i.e. 200%) as opposed to trebling damages. Id. at 22. The Court denied Power’s motion to declare the case exceptional and to award attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Id. at 24.

Complete copies of the Court’s Opinion and Order are attached.
 

Continue Reading Judge Stark Grants Prevailing Plaintiff’s Request For Enhanced Damages In Part And Denies Request For Award Of Attorneys’ Fees