Shootout at the Alsup Corral: Dissecting the Judge's 'My Best v. Your Best' Patent Approach
What really goes on in Judge William Alsup's so-called shootouts where accused infringers may wind up in "injunction city."
December 18, 2018 at 09:15 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
As my former ALM colleague Ginny LaRoe pointed out many years ago, U.S. District Judge William Alsup is a courtroom scientist who especially enjoys making bold experiments in patent cases. On Monday I learned about his latest innovation.
Alsup calls it the shootout. He instructs the patentee to pick its strongest asserted claim and the accused infringer to pick the weakest. The judge then conducts summary judgment and trial—if necessary—on an expedited schedule. This was the procedure that led to Friday's defense verdict for Juniper Networks in a cybersecurity dispute with Finjan.
Alsup has been conducting shootouts since at least 2017, but the Finjan case provides the judge's rationale in his own words. As Alsup explained back in February, few patent cases are close calls that require a jury trial. In two out of three, it turns out that one side is “way off base,” Alsup said, according to a transcript.
|
➤➤ Want to receive Skilled in the Art by email? Sign up here.
Under the shootout, if the accused infringer defeats the patent owner's strongest claim, the accused infringer might get sanctions. “And they will have to pay that right off the bat. Could be hundreds of thousands of dollars for having brought a bogus claim.”
Conversely, if the patent owner prevails, “it's injunction city,” Alsup said. “You don't have to wait until the end of the case. Whamo, the product goes off the shelf.”
“So this is why it's called a shoot-out,” the judge explained. “It's like the shoot-out at the OK Corral in Tombstone, Arizona. Where the lawyers go in there and they just shoot it out and one of them comes out alive.”
Alsup then thought better of that. “That's a terrible example to use these days so I'm going to take that back. Maybe I'll call it something else.”
One other benefit, according to the judge: Once accused infringers start targeting the weakest claims, patent owners often start dropping them from the case, which simplifies things, Alsup said. “This gets to the heart of the matter so quickly and so cleanly, instead of you all treating me like your early neutral evaluation judge and two years later I'm still trying to figure out which end is up,” the judge said.
“So that's the way we're going to proceed,” Alsup concluded. “Go back and tell your clients that the day of reckoning is close at hand.”
We hope you enjoyed this excerpt from Skilled in the Art, where Scott Graham digests the latest developments on everything IP and helps make sense of the trends, data, and politics around patents. Not a subscriber yet? Sign up for a free trial.
|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 AllSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
Democratic State AGs Revel in Role as Last Line of Defense Against Trump Agenda
7 minute readPa. Judicial Nominee Advances While Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden Picks
4 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