{"id":1695,"date":"2017-08-10T10:57:44","date_gmt":"2017-08-10T14:57:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=1695"},"modified":"2017-08-12T12:42:08","modified_gmt":"2017-08-12T16:42:08","slug":"the-sport-of-kings-federal-circuit-affirms-3-9-million-fee-award-for-two-week-trial-on-patent-ownership","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=1695","title":{"rendered":"The Sport of Kings: Federal Circuit Affirms $3.9 Million Fee Award for Two Week Trial on Patent Ownership"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/opinions-orders\/16-2647.Opinion.8-8-2017.1.PDF\">AIA America, Inc. v. Avid Radiopharamaceuticals<\/a>, [2016-2647] (August 10, 2017), the Federal Circuit\u00a0affirmed the award of attorneys fees because (1) the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial does not apply to<br \/>\nrequests for attorney\u2019s fees under \u00a7 285 of the Patent Act, (2)\u00a0the district court did not err by making factual findings\u00a0not foreclosed by the jury\u2019s verdict on standing, and (3) AIA\u2019s\u00a0due process rights were not violated.<\/p>\n<p>The Federal Circuit recounted an elaborate scheme perpetrated by plaintiff AIA and the purported sole inventor Mullan to appropriate\u00a0for themselves inventions from Imperial College (Imperial)\u00a0in London and the University of South Florida (USF). \u00a0The jury\u00a0determined\u00a0that USF did not knowingly and intentionally\u00a0waive its ownership rights to the invention and that\u00a0Hardy was a co-inventor. Based on the jury\u2019s\u00a0verdict, the district court found AIA lacked standing to\u00a0assert the U.S. Patent Nos.\u00a05,455,169 and 7,538,258, and entered judgment in\u00a0favor of Avid. \u00a0Avid then sought attorneys fees for the case (in which\u00a0in which twelve witnesses\u00a0testified and over 200 exhibits were introduced) of $6,508,687.00, and was awarded of\u00a0$3,943,317.70.<\/p>\n<p>The most interesting aspect of the case is the <a href=\"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Special_Masters_Report.pdf\">Special Master&#8217;s Report<\/a> which trimmed the attorneys fees ask from $6.5 to $3.9 million. \u00a0Highlights of which include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Reducing by more than half non-attorney time of more than 900 hours at an average rate of $227\/hour for docketing and updating case files.<\/li>\n<li>Eliminating 300 hours of attorney time ($67,000) for collecting documents, which the Special Master found to be a clerical task.<\/li>\n<li>Cutting in half the $35,000 charged by the firms Case Manager\/Training Coordinator for communications with the litigation team<\/li>\n<li>Cutting by 66% the $470,000 in attorney time for <em>assisting<\/em> with the preparation of documents.<\/li>\n<li>Cutting by\u00a02\/3 the $730,000 for preparing three witnesses for their trial testimony, in view of what the Special Master thought was &#8220;piling on&#8221;<\/li>\n<li>Cutting by 2\/3 the $633,000 spent on a motion for summary judgement on which more than 12 attorneys billed time<\/li>\n<li>Cutting in half the $308,000 spent on motions in limine<\/li>\n<li>Cutting in half the $240,000 spent on preparing the pretrial memorandum and preparation for the pretrial hearing<\/li>\n<li>Cutting the 654 hours spent preparing the Exhibit List and Witness list by $100,000<\/li>\n<li>Cutting by 2\/3 the $414,400.50 (846 hours) for preparing an expert witness who was not called at trial<\/li>\n<li>Cutting by half the $1,098,654.50 billed for attendance at trial, finding that it difficult to understand the contribution of eight lawyers to the trial.<\/li>\n<li>Cutting local counsels fees for merely attending the trial.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>All in all, the Special Master reduced the fees requested by $2.9 million. This still resulted in the $3.9 million award affirmed by the Federal Circuit, proving once again that patent litigation is the sport of kings, and that if you have to ask &#8220;how much,&#8221; you probably can&#8217;t afford it.<\/p>\n<p>.<\/p>\n<p>.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In AIA America, Inc. v. Avid Radiopharamaceuticals, [2016-2647] (August 10, 2017), the Federal Circuit\u00a0affirmed the award of attorneys fees because (1) the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial does not apply to requests for attorney\u2019s fees under \u00a7 285 &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=1695\">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":[44],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1695","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-attorneys-fees"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1695","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=1695"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1695\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1697,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1695\/revisions\/1697"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1695"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1695"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1695"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}