§Why CasetextPricing

TheBrain Technologies, LP v. AnyLogic North America, LLC

MOTION

16 Cited authorities

  1. Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc.

    572 U.S. 545 (2014)   Cited 1,382 times   122 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an "exceptional" case under § 285 is "one that stands out from others with respect to the substantive strength of a party's litigating position ... or the unreasonable manner in which the case was litigated"

  2. Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n

    434 U.S. 412 (1978)   Cited 3,639 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for a defendant to recoup attorneys fees under § 706(k) of Title VII, a court must find that the plaintiff litigated his or her claim beyond the point where it became “frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless” or where plaintiff acted in bad faith

  3. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. E.E.O.C.

    578 U.S. 419 (2016)   Cited 244 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "defendant has ... fulfilled its primary objective whenever the plaintiff’s challenge is rebuffed, irrespective of the precise reason for the court’s decision ," and that a "defendant may prevail even if the court’s final judgment rejects the plaintiff’s claim for a nonmerits reason"

  4. Nystrom v. Trex Co.

    339 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 122 times
    Finding no jurisdiction when invalidity and unenforceability counterclaims remain pending at the district court

  5. Raniere v. Microsoft Corp.

    887 F.3d 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2018)   Cited 58 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "voluntary dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 'has the necessary judicial imprimatur to constitute a judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties, such that the district court properly could entertain [the defendant's] fee claim under 35 U.S.C. § 285."

  6. H.R. Tech., Inc. v. Astechnologies, Inc.

    275 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2002)   Cited 71 times
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the plaintiffs complaint without prejudice for lack of standing

  7. Inland Steel Co. v. LTV Steel Co.

    364 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2004)   Cited 64 times
    Holding that a patent infringement defendant, who moved for dismissal after obtaining cancellation of patents through reexamination proceedings before the Patent and Trademark Office obtained a disposition on the merits in infringement action for purposes of obtaining attorney fees and costs

  8. Safetcare v. Tele-Made

    497 F.3d 1262 (Fed. Cir. 2007)   Cited 41 times
    Holding that a premature notice of appeal from a tribunal decision ripens when that tribunal's decision becomes final

  9. Robinson v. O'Rourke

    891 F.3d 976 (Fed. Cir. 2018)   Cited 6 times
    Applying CRST and affirming determination that appellant was not a prevailing party under EAJA where "the remand reflects the Veterans Court’s discretionary decision to allow a waived argument to proceed"

  10. Direct Fitness Solutions, LLC v. Direct Fitness Solutions, LLC

    281 F. Supp. 3d 697 (N.D. Ill. 2017)   Cited 2 times
    Finding that the defendant was a prevailing party even though the court had dismissed the claims for lack of personal jurisdiction and the plaintiff could refile his claims against the defendant in another court

  11. Section 285 - Attorney fees

    35 U.S.C. § 285   Cited 3,195 times   475 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts discretion to award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in exceptional cases

  12. Section 286 - Time limitation on damages

    35 U.S.C. § 286   Cited 323 times   80 Legal Analyses
    Precluding recovery for infringement more than six years prior to the filing of the complaint or counterclaim