{"id":1638,"date":"2017-07-11T00:02:35","date_gmt":"2017-07-11T04:02:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=1638"},"modified":"2017-07-11T00:03:15","modified_gmt":"2017-07-11T04:03:15","slug":"lack-of-clarity-for-reason-for-denying-permanent-injunction-results-in-remand","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=1638","title":{"rendered":"Lack of Clarity for Reason for Denying Permanent Injunction Results in Remand"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/opinions-orders\/17-1148.Opinion.7-6-2017.1.PDF\">Genband US LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Corp.<\/a>, [2017-1148] (July 1-, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated the denial of a permanent injunction, and remanded for reconsideration.<\/p>\n<p>The jury found\u00a0U.S. Patent Nos.\u00a06,772,210; 6,791,971; 6,885,658; 6,934,279; 7,995,589;\u00a07,047,561; 7,184,427; and 7,990,984 not invalid and infringed, and awarded\u00a0$8,168,400 in damages, but the district court denied a permanent injunction. \u00a0The district court rested\u00a0its denial entirely on the determination that Genband\u00a0failed to show that it would suffer irreparable harm from\u00a0continued infringement. \u00a0The court\u00a0declared that Genband had to prove that \u201cthe patented\u00a0features drive demand for the product.],\u201d but the Federal Circuit could not be sure that the district court applied the proper nexus, i.e. whether the district court required that the patented feature be &#8220;the driver&#8221; or simply &#8220;a driver.&#8221; \u00a0The Federal Circuit said it is sufficient that the record\u00a0established that the patented features \u00a0influence\u00a0consumers\u2019 perceptions of and desire for these products. \u00a0Based upon the district court&#8217;s opinion, the Federal Circuit had no basis for inferring that\u00a0the district court actually used the correct standard, rather\u00a0than an unduly stringent test, to interpret and apply the\u00a0\u201cdrive demand\u201d standard.<\/p>\n<p>The Federal Circuit said that a patentee\u00a0may\u00a0be able to make the causal connection between infringement\u00a0and the relevant lost sales through evidence of\u00a0various kinds, e.g., that the infringing features significantly<br \/>\nincreased the product\u2019s desirability, that soundly supports an inference of causation of a significant number\u00a0of purchasers\u2019 decisions.<\/p>\n<p>The Federal Circuit determined that remand was needed for the district court to clarify its how Genband&#8217;s evidence was not sufficient.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In Genband US LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Corp., [2017-1148] (July 1-, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated the denial of a permanent injunction, and remanded for reconsideration. The jury found\u00a0U.S. Patent Nos.\u00a06,772,210; 6,791,971; 6,885,658; 6,934,279; 7,995,589;\u00a07,047,561; 7,184,427; and 7,990,984 not invalid &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=1638\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[55],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1638","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-injunction"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1638"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1639,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638\/revisions\/1639"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1638"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1638"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1638"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}