Intellectual Property Owners Association

Serving the Global Intellectual Property Community

ReadMore

2016 Attorney Fee Shifting

On 28 December, Judge REIDINGER of the Western District of North Carolina denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Sociedad Espanola De Electromedicina Y Calidad v. Blue Ridge X-Ray Co.

On 22 December, Magistrate Judge MCCOY of the Middle District of Florida recommended denying the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Peschke Map Technologies LLC v. Miromar Development Corp.

On 20 December, Magistrate Judge HARRIS TOLIVER of the Northern District of Texas recommended granting the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Wright v. E-Systems LLC.

On 14 December, Judge LEFKOW of the Northern District of Illinois denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. ClearLamp, LLC v. LKQ Corporation

On 8 December, Judge COTE of the Southern District of New York granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Gust, Inc. v. Alphacap Ventures LLC.

On 23 November, Judge GILSTRAP of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Nexuscard, Inc. v. Brookshire Grocery Company.

On 22 November, Magistrate Judge SHAFFER of the District of Colorado denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Hach Company v. In-Situ, Inc.

On 21 November, Judge DAVIS of the Eastern District of Virginia denied without prejudice the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Certusview Technologies LLC v. S&N Locating Services LLC.

On 18 November, Judge RICHARD NELSON of the District of Minnesota granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Hydreon Corporation v. JC Brothers, Inc.

On 18 November, Judge SABRAW of the Southern District of California granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Security5 LLC v. VSN Mobil, Inc.

On 9 November, Judge MARTINEZ of the Western District of Washington denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Loops LLC v. Phoenix Trading, Inc.

On 3 November, Judge SHARPE of the Northern District of New York denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. PPC Broadband, Inc. v. Corning Optical Communications LLC

On 3 November, Judge LASNIK of the Western District of Washington granted the declaratory judgement plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees. Eko Brands, Inc. v. Rivera

On 27 October, Judge SCHROEDER of the Eastern District of Texas denied the patent owners motion for attorney fees. Nobelbiz, Inc. v. Global Connect, LLC.

On 26 October, Judge SEEBORG of the Northern District of California denied the declaratory judgement plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees. Whitepages, Inc. v. Isaacs.

On 24 October, Judge GILSTRAP of the Eastern District of Texas denied the patent owners motion for attorney fees. Whirlpool Corporation. v. Ozcan.

On 24 October, Magistrate Judge PAYNE of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. E2E Processing, Inc. v. Cabela’s Inc.

On 24 October, Judge JOHNSON COLEMAN of the Northern District of Illinois granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Marshall Feature Recognition, LLC v. Wendy’s International, Inc.

On 20 October, Judge ABRAMS of the Southern District of New York denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Anchor Sales & Marketing, Inc. v. Richloom Fabrics Group, Inc.

On 18 October, Judge MCBRYDE of the Northern District of Texas granted the declaratory judgement plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees. Industrial Models, Inc. v. SNF, Inc.

On 12 October, Magistrate Judge PAYNE of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. DSS Technology Management, Inc. v. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.

On 7 October, Judge LAKE of the Southern District of Texas denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. SAP America, Inc. v. Wellogix, Inc.

On 4 October, Judge GILSTRAP of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Gonzalez v. Infostream Group, Inc.

On 3 October, Judge KEARNEY of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Dominion Resources, Inc. v. Alstom Grid, Inc.

On 28 September, Judge BECKWITH of the Southern District of Ohio granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. R+L Carriers, Inc. v. Qualcomm, Inc.

On 27 September, Judge BLAKE of the District of Maryland denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. TWI Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

On 27 September, Judge PETERSON of the Western District of Wisconsin denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. VocalTag LTD v. Agis Automatisering B.V.

On 27 September, Judge STARK of the District of Delaware denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Sarif BioMedical LLC v. BrainLab, Inc.

On 26 September, Judge ATLAS of the Southern District of Texas denied the accused infringers’ motion for additional attorney fees. Chaffin v. Braden II.

On 26 September, Judge SCHROEDER of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. National Cheng Kung University v. Intel Corp.

On 14 September, Judge TIGAR of the Northern District of California denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Sebastian Lagree v. Spartacus 20th LP.

On 6 September, Judge COHN of the Southern District of Florida denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Amgen, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc.

On 6 September, Magistrate Judge CAPEL of the Middle District of Alabama recommended granting the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Hunter’s Edge, LLC v. Primos, Inc.

On 2 September, Judge LYNN of the Northern District of Texas granted the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Raniere v. Microsoft Corp.

On 1 September, Judge TEILBORG of the District of Arizona denied the patent owner’s and accused infringer’s motions for attorney fees. GoDaddy.com, LLC v. RPost Communications, Ltd.

On 26 August, Judge PHIPPS MCCALLA of the Western District of Tennessee granted in part and denied in part the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. WCM Industries, Inc. v. IPS Corp.

On 25 August, Judge VITALIANO of the Eastern District of New York denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Travel Sentry, Inc. v. Tropp.

On 22 August, Judge MAZZANT of the Eastern District of Texas denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Motio, Inc. v. BSP Software, LLC.

On 22 August, Judge WHYTE of the Northern District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Radware, Ltd. v. F5 Networks, Inc.

On 22 August, Judge ORRICK of the Northern District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Thought, Inc. v. Oracle Corp.

On 19 August, Magistrate Judge MCCARTHY of the Western District of New York recommended again denying the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Gaymar Industries v. Cincinnati Sub-Zero Products, Inc.

On 18 August, Judge ANDREWS of the District of Delaware denied without prejudice the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Sprint Communications, Co. v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC.

On 18 August, Judge KOH of the Northern District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. v. Xilinx, Inc.

On 17 August, Judge HUFF of the Southern District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Presidio Components, Inc. v. American Technical Ceramics Corp.

On 17 August, Judge GONZALEZ ROGERS of the Northern District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Gonzalez v. Tagged, Inc.

On 11 August, Judge LABSON FREEMAN of the Northern District of California court granted the declaratory judgment plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees. Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Merck & Co.

On 9 August, Judge ZOUHARY of the Central District of California denied the patent owners’ motion for attorney fees. Grober v. Mako Products, Inc.

On 1 August, Judge ATLAS of the Southern District of Texas  granted the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Chaffin v. Braden.

On 22 July, Judge CHESLER of the District of New Jersey denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Tyco Healthcare Group v. Mutual Pharmaceutical Co.

On 22 July, Judge SARIS of the District Court of Massachusetts granted in part and denied in part the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Trustees of Boston University v. Everlight Electronics, Co.

On 22 July, Judge SHADUR of the Northern District of Illinois granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Atlas IP, LLC v. Exelon Corp.

On 18 July, Judge BENSON of the District of Utah denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Petter Investments, Inc. v. Hydro Engineering, Inc.

On 18 July, Judge CONLEY of the Western District of Wisconsin denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Ameritox, Ltd. v. Millenium Health, LLC.

On 18 July, Judge JONES of the Western District of Washington denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Recognicorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co.

On 18 July, Judge PAYNE of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Rothschild Connected Devices Innovations, Inc. v. Guardian Protection Services, Inc.

On 18 July, Judge LABSON FREEMAN of the Northern District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc.

On 12 July, Judge CARTER of the Central District of California denied the patent owners’ motion for attorney fees. Gryphon Mobile Electronics, LLC v. Brookestone, Inc.

On 6 July, Judge CARNEY of the Central District of California denied the patent owners’ motion for attorney fees. Gryphon Mobile Electronics, LLC v. Voltiger Power, Inc.

On 5 July, Judge YOUNG of the Southern District of Indiana denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. CPS Technologies, Inc. v. Sud-Chemie, Inc.

On 30 June, Magistrate Judge LOVE of the Eastern District of Texas recommended granting the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Chimar Systems, Inc. v. Adtran, Inc.

On 29 June, Magistrate Judge FERENBACH of the District of Nevada recommended denying the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. SHFL Entertainment, Inc. v. Digideal Corp. 

On 23 June, Judge MARRA of the Southern District of Florida denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Cobra International, Inc. v. BCNY International, Inc.

On 23 June, Judge SELNA of the Central District of California granted the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Kinglite Holdings, Inc. v. Micro-Star International Co.

On 17 June, Judge SAYLOR of the District of Massachusetts denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. Micron Technology, Inc.

On 16 June, Judge SCHROEDER of the Eastern District of Texas granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Georgetown Rail Equipment Co. v. Holland, L.P.

On 14 June, Judge KRONSTADT of the Central District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. TZU Technologies, LLC v. Winzz, LLC.

On 13 June, Judge WHITE of the Eastern District of Missouri denied the declaratory judgement plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees. Sudden Valley Supply, LLC v. Ziegmann.

On 9 June, Judge STATON of the Central District of California denied without prejudice the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Oakley, Inc. v. Moda Collection, LLC

On 8 June, Judge ERICKSEN of the District of Minnesota granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Johnny Rhymes with Connie, LLC v. Giftland Works, LLC.

On 6 June, Magistrate Judge BAKER of the Middle District of Florida recommended denying the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Acme Worldwide Enterprises v. Industrial Smoke & Mirrors, Inc.

On 31 May, Judge SLEET of the District of Delaware granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Inventor Holdings, LLC v. Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc.

On 23 May, Judge BENCIVENGO of the Southern District of California granted the declaratory judgement plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees. Sonix Technology Co. v. Yoshida.

On 11 May, Judge BATAILLON of the District of Nebraska denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Exmark Manufacturing Co. v. Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLC.

On 5 May, Judge ALTONAGA of the Southern District of Florida denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Atlas IP, LLC v. Medtronic, Inc.

On 5 May, Judge OTERO of the Central District of California granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. HeadBlade, Inc. v. Products Unlimited, LLC.

On 2 May, Judge ROBINSON of the District of Delaware denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. YYZ, LLC v. Pegasystems, Inc.

On 28 April, Judge SHAH of the Northern District of Illinois denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Snap-On, Inc. v. Robert Bosch, LLC.

On 27 April, Judge SABRAW of the Southern District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Clarilogic, Inc. v. Formfree Holdings Corp.

On 25 April, Judge RAKOFF of the Southern District of New York denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Tomita Technologies USA, LLC v. Nintendo Co.

On 21 April, Judge MOORE of the District of Colorado granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Bovino v. Levenger Co.

On 19 April, Judge ST. EVE of the Northern District of Illinois denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Sonix Technology Co. v. Publications International, Ltd.

On 13 April, Judge DANIEL of the District of Colorado denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Port-A-Pour, Inc. v. Peak Innovations, Inc.

On 12 April, Judge KRONSTADT of the Central District of California denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. SAWT, Inc. v. Joe Moore Construction, Inc.

On 8 April, Judge MARTINEZ of the District of Colorado denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. XY, LLC v. Trans Ova Genetics, LLC.

On 7 April, Judge LYNN of the Northern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Credit Card Fraud Control Corp. v. Maxmind, Inc.

On 1 April, Judge HERNANDEZ of the District of Oregon denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Skedco, Inc. v. Strategic Operations, Inc.

On 31 March, Judge STARK of the District of Delaware denied a defendant intervenor’s motion for attorney fees. Princeton Digital Image Corp. v. Office Depot, Inc.

On 31 March, Judge HILLMAN of the District of New Jersey granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Source Search Technologies, LLC v. Kayak Software Corp.

On 31 March, Judge ROBINSON of the District of Delaware granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC v. Jack Henry & Associates.

On 31 March, Judge ROBINSON of the District of Delaware denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Apeldyn Corp. v. Sony Corp.

On 31 March, Judge SCHROEDER of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Parallel Networks, LLC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

On 31 March, Judge ARGUELLO of the District of Colorado denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Sinox Co., v. Wordlock, Inc.

On 30 March, Judge SIMANDLE of the District of New Jersey granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Garfum.com Corp. v. Reflections By Ruth.

On 30 March, Judge CHEN of the Northern District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Aylus Networks, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

On 28 March, Judge GILSTRAP of the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Adjustacam, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc.

On 28 March, Judge CLARK of the Eastern District of Texas granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Kryptek Outdoor Group, LLC v. Salt Armour, Inc.

On 21 March, Judge GUILFORD of the Central District of California denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Polar Electro, Inc. 

On 21 March, Magistrate Judge SPERO of the Northern District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Gens v. Amerimade Technology, Inc.

On 18 March, Judge SCHROEDER of the Eastern District of Texas granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Adaptix, Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc.

On 17 March, Judge CONNER of the Middle District of Pennsylvania denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Arlington Industries, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings, Inc.

On 16 March, Judge ERICKSON of the District of North Dakota denied the declaratory judgment plaintiff’s and the third-party accused infringer’s motions for attorney fees. Energy Heating, LLC v. Heat-On-The-Fly, LLC.

On 14 March, Judge KRIEGER of the District of Colorado denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Bovino v. Amazon.com, Inc.

On 9 March, Judge BATTEN of the Northern District of Georgia denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Sarvint Technologies, Inc. v. Carre Technologies, Inc.

On 2 March, Magistrate Judge ALEXANDER of the Northern District of Mississippi denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Homesafe Inspection, Inc. v. Hayes

On 29 February, Judge SELNA of the Central District of California granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Sundesa LLC v. Giant Sports Products LLC.

On 22 February, Judge ANDREWS in the District of Delaware denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Pi-Net International, Inc. v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

On 19 February, Magistrate Judge POLSTER CHAPPELL of the Middle District of Florida denied without prejudice the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Chico’s FAS, Inc. v. Claire

On 18 February, Judge ANDREWS of the District of Delaware denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Pragmatus Telecom, LLC v. Newegg, Inc.

On 18 February, Magistrate Judge POLSTER CHAPPELL of the Middle District of Florida denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Canvs Corp. v. Nivisys, LLC

On 16 February, Magistrate Judge SEGAL of the Central District of California denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Enovsys, LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC

On 11 February, Judge EAGLES of the Middle District of North Carolina denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Duke University v. Apotex, Inc.

On 10 February, Judge EAGLES of the Middle District of North Carolina denied the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Duke University v. Sandoz, Inc.

On 4 February, Magistrate Judge SIMONTON of the Southern District of Florida recommended granting the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Flexiteek Americas, Inc. v. Plasteak, Inc.

On 4 February, Judge SIPPEL of the Eastern District of Missouri denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Mary Elle Fashions, Inc. v. Jasco Products Co.

On 2 February, Judge CONWAY of the Middle District of Florida affirmed the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge denying the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Sweepstakes Patent Co. v. Burns

On 26 January, Magistrate Judge SNEED of the Middle District of Florida recommended denying the accused infringers’ motion for attorney fees. Freedom Scientific, Inc. v. Enhanced Vision Systems, Inc.

On 21 January, Judge REAL of the Central District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. United Construction Products, Inc. v. Tile Tech, Inc.

On 7 January, Judge GILLIAM of the Northern District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. TVIIM, LLC v. McAfee, Inc.