On November 19 the Federal Circuit, in an order by Judge HUGHES, granted the accused infringer’s motion in part and awarded $15,000 in attorney fees, expenses and costs resulting from the patent owner’s frivolous appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. (Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc. et al)
On November 20, Judge GUILFORD in the Central District of California awarded about $940,000 in attorney fees to the accused infringer. (Cambrian Science Corp. v. Cox Communications, Inc.)
On November 20, Magistrate Judge TURNOFF in the Southern District of Florida recommended denying the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. (Net Talk.com, Inc. v. magicJack Vocaltec Ltd.)
On November 24, Magistrate Judge SPAUDLING in the Middle District of Florida recommended denying the accused infringer’s renewed motion for attorney fees. (Sweepstakes Patent Company, LLC v. Burns)
On November 25, Judge STEWART in the District of Utah denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. (Orbit Irrigation Products, Inc. v. Sunhills International, LLC)
On November 30, Judge STEWART in the District of Utah awarded $220,000 in attorney fees to the patent owner. (Orbit Irrigation Products, Inc. v. Sunhills International, LLC)
On November 30, Magistrate Judge RYU in the Northern District of California denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. (AAT Bioquest, Inc. v. Texas Fluorescence Laboratories, Inc.)
On December 1, Judge MIDDLEBROOKS in the Southern District of Florida granted $684,000 in attorney fees to the accused infringer. (Advanced Ground Information Systems, Inc. v. Life360, Inc.)
On December 4, Judge NUGENT in the Northern District of Ohio denied the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Healthspot, Inc. v. Computerized Screening, Inc.
On December 4, Judge MIDDLEBROOKS in the Southern District of Florida granted $5.3 million in attorney fees to the accused infringer. Apotex, Inc. v. UCB, Inc.
On December 9, Judge ROGERS in the Northern District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. AngioScore, Inc. v. TriReme Medical, Inc.
On December 9, Judge MCKINNEY in the Southern District of Indiana denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Endotach LLC v. Cook Medical Inc.
On December 10, Judge MILLER in the Southern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees.TDE Petroleum Data Solutions, Inc. v. AKM Enterprise, Inc.
On December 11, Judge SABRAW in the Southern District of California granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Digital Empire Ltd. v. Compal Electronics, Inc.
On December 14, Judge MCMAHON in the Southern District of New York awarded over $500,000 in attorney fees to the accused infringer. Advanced Video Technologies LLC v. HTC Corp.
On December 17, Judge GILSTRAP in the Eastern District of Texas granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. eDekka LLC v. 3balls.com, Inc.
On December 21, Judge GILSTRAP in the Eastern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Mears Technology, Inc. v. Finisar Corp.
On December 22, Special Master COHEN in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recommended granting $3.9 million in attorney fees to the accused infringer. Alzheimer’s Institute of America, Inc. v. Avid Radiopharmaceuticals
On December 23, Judge CARNEY in the Central District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. SASCO v. Weber Electric Manufacturing Co.
On December 28, Judge ANDREWS in the District of Delaware granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Vehicle Interface Technologies, LLC v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC
