On Jan. 22, 2016, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's finding that the patent infringement case was exceptional but vacated the award of enhanced attorney fees to defendant because the court didn't properly explain the calculation of attorney fees. Lumen View Tech., LLC v. Findthebest.com, No. 2015-1275, -1325 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 22, 2016). Plaintiff sued defendant alleging infringement of a patent directed to a method of facilitating bilateral and multilateral decision-making. In its opposition to plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings under FRCP 12(c), plaintiff included claim construction that required two or more parties' preference data. The district court granted the motion and held that the claims were directed to an abstract idea and invalid under Section 101. The court also found that the suit was frivolous and awarded attorney fees. The Federal Circuit held that the court was justified in finding the case exceptional because even the "most basic" presuit investigation by plaintiff would've shown that the accused functionality required only one party. The judge reasonably found that the suit was filed for extracting nuisance settlement and that the plaintiff had a predatory strategy of baseless litigation. However, the Federal Circuit reversed the trial court's enhancement by a multiplier of two of the lodestar fee amount and explained that adjusting the lodestar amount is not appropriate when considering other factors--deterrence purpose or expedited schedule--unrelated to suitability of compensation of attorney fees.
Disclaimer: The content in this blog is solely for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.