Pop Stars Pushing the Edge of Attorney Fee Law
An appeal by Justin Timberlake and Britney Spears could determine whether legal fees from PTO proceedings are recoverable in "exceptional" patent cases.
May 30, 2018 at 01:29 PM
3 minute read
Justin Timberlake and Britney Spears could be on the verge of making new law on the reach of “exceptional case” attorney fee awards in patent cases.
The pop stars were before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for a second time May 4, seeking to preserve a $737,000 fee award in a patent dispute over panoramic video displays used in past concerts.
The Federal Circuit encouraged Pryor Cashman partner Andrew Langsam, who represents the pop stars, and Dwayne Goetzel, counsel for patentee Large Audience Display Systems, to try to work out on their own how much was spent before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and exclude it from the award. The court suggested the parties could then settle Large Audience Display Systems v. Tennman Productions themselves, rather than have it sent back to U.S. District Judge Manuel Real of the Central District of California for a third go-round.
But Langsam and Goetzel, of Meyertons, Hood, Kivlin, Kowert & Goetzel, notified the court last week that they were unable to reach an agreement. Langsam said only $196,854 was spent at the PTAB, while Goetzel put the figure at $428,000 or more.
The Federal Circuit has already sent the case back to Real once, suggesting that he reconsider the exceptionality finding and the amount of fees awarded. But Real stuck closely to his original reasoning and award, actually increasing the amount by $4,000.
That led to a raucous hearing this month at which the Federal Circuit judges expressed exasperation with both sides—and particularly Real's inclusion of fees for a lengthy PTO re-examination hearing where the patent ultimately was invalidated.
“If you look at the re-exam, it's got papers this high,” said Langsam, who represents the pop stars.
“But we can't give you hours for re-exam,” Judge Kathleen O'Malley replied.
“That's not part of the litigation,” Judge Richard Linn explained. “That's a separate legal proceeding.”
Actually, the custom of awarding exceptional case fees for PTO proceedings appears to vary from district to district. U.S. District Judge William Walls of the District of New Jersey just imposed a $13 million fee award against a medical device company last month for work that included a re-examination proceeding, among other things. And the Federal Circuit has approved such a fee award, albeit 30 years ago. But U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber of the Northern District of Illinois rejected PTO fees in another case last week, saying “fees related to a separate legal proceeding cannot be recovered.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
Auditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute readTexas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250