§Why CasetextPricing

EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Attorney Fees

11 Cited authorities

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

    572 U.S. 545 (2014)   Cited 1,468 times   123 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. Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.

    510 U.S. 517 (1994)   Cited 2,918 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988

  3. Alyeska Pipeline Co. v. Wilderness Soc'y

    421 U.S. 240 (1975)   Cited 4,794 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding American Rule governed absent specific statutory authorization for awarding attorney fees to prevailing party

  4. MarcTec, LLC v. Johnson & Johnson

    664 F.3d 907 (Fed. Cir. 2012)   Cited 146 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding it was litigation misconduct for a plaintiff to "persist in advancing unfounded arguments that unnecessarily extended litigation," and that plaintiff's "decision to continue the litigation after claim construction" supported the exceptional case finding

  5. Transclean Corp. v. Bridgewood Serv., Inc.

    290 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2002)   Cited 182 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Upholding district court's construction of a term based on purpose of the invention and disputed term's use within the specification.

  6. Spectralytics, Inc. v. Cordis Corp.

    649 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2011)   Cited 81 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, while a finding of willfulness is a “prerequisite” to the award of enhanced damages, the “ ‘paramount determination in deciding to grant enhancement and the amount thereof is the egregiousness of the defendant's conduct based on all the facts and circumstances.’ ” (quoting Read Corp. v. Portec, Inc., 970 F.2d 816, 826 (Fed.Cir.1992))

  7. S.C. Johnson Son, Inc. v. Carter-Wallace

    781 F.2d 198 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 162 times
    Holding it necessary for a district court to explain why a case is not exceptional when an express finding of willful infringement has been made

  8. Eltech Systems Corp. v. PPG Industries, Inc.

    903 F.2d 805 (Fed. Cir. 1990)   Cited 115 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding exceptional case based on total lack of evidence to show infringement

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

    112 F. Supp. 3d 888 (D. Minn. 2015)   Cited 9 times
    Finding improper motivation reflected in e-mails stating, "We are suing Octane. Not only are we coming out with a great product to go after them, but throwing a lawsuit on top of that," and "Funny thing is—this patent is over 10 years old! . . . Old patent we had for a long time that was sitting on the shelf"

  10. Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,141 times   481 Legal Analyses
    Holding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."

  11. Section 285 - Attorney fees

    35 U.S.C. § 285   Cited 3,257 times   494 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts discretion to award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in exceptional cases