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

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"

Gomez v. Vernon

Holding that "repeated threats of transfer because of [the plaintiff's] complaints about the administration of the [prison] library" were sufficient to ground a retaliation claim

MarcTec, LLC v. Johnson & Johnson

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

Yufa v. TSI Incorporated

Finding exceptional conduct where the plaintiff filed the lawsuit without testing the accused products and continued litigation despite overwhelming evidence of non-infringement

Kilopass Technology, Inc. v. Sidense Corp.

Finding the case to be exceptional where the plaintiff litigated the action in an unreasonable manner "by failing to conduct an adequate pre-filing investigation, shifting its theories of infringement late in the litigation and without following the proper procedures for amendment of contentions, and engaging in conduct that at times amounted to gamesmanship"

Baldwin Hardware Corp. v. Franksu Enterprise

Holding that substantive and procedural issues not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit are guided by the law of the regional circuit

Logic Devices, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Finding numerous instances of egregious behavior by plaintiff including blindly adopting and filing a complaint drafted by another firm; waiting four months to serve defendant; misrepresenting that a terminal disclaimer had been filed; and failing to comply with patent local rules

IPVX Patent Holdings, Inc. v. Voxernet LLC

Finding the case exceptional because the plaintiff never expected to prevail on literal infringement, proposed term constructions that were "absurd and farfetched," served a "boilerplate complaint on dozens of defendants," may not have performed pre-suit investigation, served inapplicable discovery requests, and did not expend the resources necessary to support its positions on infringement

Chalumeau Power Sys. LLC v. Alcatel-Lucent U.S. Inc.

Rule 41 - Dismissal of Actions

Holding that such dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits"

Rule 54 - Judgment; Costs

Holding party seeking fees may additionally seek "nontaxable expenses"

Section 1404 - Change of venue

Granting Class Plaintiffs' motion to transfer action in order to "facilitate a unified settlement approval process together with the class action cases in" In re Amex ASR

Section 1927 - Counsel's liability for excessive costs

Granting courts the power to charge "excess costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees reasonably incurred" due to "unreasonabl[e] and vexatious" conduct

Section 285 - Attorney fees

Granting district courts discretion to award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in exceptional cases