On May 21, Judge SULLIVAN in the Southern District of New York denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Princeton Digital Image Corp. v. Hewlett-Packard Co.
On May 29, Judge PEARSON in the Northern District of Ohio denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Robbins Company v. Herrenknecht Tunneling Systems USA, Inc.
On June 1, Judge BENCIVENGO in the Southern District of California granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Deep Sky Software, Inc. v. Southwest Airlines Co.
On June 1, Judge DAVIS in 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 June 4, Judge O’CONNELL in the Central District of California denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees in a declaratory judgment suit. Sport Dimension, Inc. v. The Coleman Company, Inc.
On June 5, Judge LAPORTE in the Northern District of California granted the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Alzheimer’s Institute of America v. Elan Corp. PLC
On June 12, Judge SCHWAB in the Western District of Pennsylvania granted the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Drone Technologies, Inc. v. Parrot, Inc.
On June 18, Judge BUMB in the District of Delaware granted $5.9 million in attorney fees to the accused infringer. Bayer CropScience AG v. Dow Agrosciences LLC
On June 18, Judge ROSENTHAL in the Southern District of Texas denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Western Falcon, Inc. v. Moore Rod & Pipe, LLC
On June 22, Judge BLAKE in the District of Maryland denied without prejudice the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees in a declaratory judgment suit. Novartis Corp. v. Webvention Holdings LLC
On June 23, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a per curiam decision, upheld the Central District of California’s decision to deny the patent owner’s motion for attorney fees. Jake Lee v. Mike’s Novelties, Inc.
On June 23, Judge MEANS in the Northern District of Texas granted $4.7 million in attorney fees to the accused infringer. Highmark, Inc. v. Allcare Health Management Systems, Inc.
On June 24, Judge O’CONNELL in the Central District of California granted $119,855 in attorney fees to the accused infringer. Action Star Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. KaiJet Tech Int’l., Ltd.
On June 24, Judge BEATY in the Middle District of North Carolina denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Armacell LLC v. Aeroflex USA, Inc.
On June 25, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit remanded a case in which the Western District of New York denied the accused infringer’s motion for attorney fees. Gaymar Industries, Inc. v. Cincinnati Sub-Zero Products, Inc.
