Fractus v. Samsung Elecs. Co.
| Decision Date | 28 June 2012 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 6:09–CV–203. |
| Citation | 876 F.Supp.2d 802 |
| Parties | FRACTUS, S.A., Plaintiff v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Matthew Behncke, Susman Godfrey, Max Lalon Tribble, Jr., Fiona Ann Bell, Leslie V. Payne, Micah John Howe, Houston, TX, Daniel J. Shih, Genevieve Joanne Vose, Justin Adatto Nelson, Susman Godfrey, LLP, Seattle, WA, Daymon Jeffrey Rambin, Elizabeth L. Derieux, Sidney Calvin Capshaw, III, Gladewater, TX, Jack Wesley Hill, Thomas John Ward, Jr., Ward & Smith Law Firm, Longview, TX, Michael F. Heim, Denver, CO, for Plaintiff.
Allen Franklin Gardner, Michael E. Jones, Potter Minton, A Professional Corporation, Tyler, TX, Chang Sik Kim, Eric J. Faragi, Neil P. Sirota, Robert L. Maier, Baker Botts, New York, NY, George A. Riley, Patrick Michael Lonergan, O'Melveny & Myers, San Francisco, CA, Michael Joseph Barta, Michael Calhoon, Nicholas Carlson Margida, Baker Botts LLP, Washington, DC, Philip C. Ducker, Menlo Park, CA, for Defendants.
Victoria L. Cook, Los Angeles, CA.
Before the Court are the parties' post-trial motions. Having considered the parties' written submissions and oral arguments, the Court: DENIES Samsung's Renewed Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law that: (1) Samsung Does Not Infringe Any Claim of the Patents–in–Suit; (2) the Asserted Claims of the Patents–in–Suit are Invalid; (3) Samsung is Not A Willful Infringer; and (4) the Damages Award was Improper (Docket No. 1025, “JMOL”); DENIES Samsung's Motion Under Rule 52 for Entry of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding Indefiniteness (Docket No. 1026, “Mtn Fact And Law”); DENIES Samsung's Motion for New Trial Under Rule 59 Based on Material Errors in Evidentiary Rulings (Docket No. 1027, “New Trial Mtn”); GRANTS–IN–PART Fractus S.A.'s Motion for Enhanced Damages and Attorneys' Fees (Docket No. 1028, “Enhanced Damages Mtn”); DENIES Fractus S.A.'s Motion for Permanent Injunction, and SEVERS Fractus's request for an Ongoing Royalty into a separate action (Docket No. 1030, “injunction Mtn”); and GRANTS Fractus, S.A.'s Motion for Prejudgment Interest and Bill of Costs (Docket No. 1032, “Interest and Costs Mtn”””).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Biogen 755 Patent Litig.
... ... Int'l Trade Comm'n , 629 F.3d 1331, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2010) ); see also Summit 6, LLC v. Samsung Elecs. Co. , 802 F.3d 1283, 1294 (Fed. Cir. 2015) ("A claim is anticipated only if each and every ... CMI USA, Inc. , 100 F.Supp.3d 871, 892 (N.D. Cal. 2015) ; Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Elecs. Co. , 876 F.Supp.2d 802, 838 (E.D. Tex. 2012). (b) Parties' Contentions ... ...
-
Westerngeco L.L.C. v. Ion Geophysical Corp.
... ... ’ An excessive award exceeds the ‘maximum amount calculable from the evidence.’ ” Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 876 F.Supp.2d 802, 831 (E.D.Tex.2012). A. Lost Profits 1. Foreign ... ...
-
Erfindergemeinschaft UroPep GbR v. Eli Lilly & Co.
... ... defendant waived that theory by not presenting it at 276 F.Supp.3d 654 trial); see also Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Elecs. Co. , 876 F.Supp.2d 802, 838 (E.D. Tex. 2012) (defendant waived affirmative ... ...
-
VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc.
... ... 6:09cv479, slip op. at 14, 2012 WL 8144915 (E.D.Tex. Jan. 9, 2012); Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 876 F.Supp.2d 802, 856 (E.D.Tex.2012); TeleCons, et al. v. General ... ...
-
9-2 MONETARY RELIEF
...of customer preference insufficient to support application of the entire market value rule).[54] Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 876 F.Supp. 2d 802, 835 (E.D. Tex. 2012).[55] See Lighting Ballast Control, LLC v. Philips Elecs. N. Am. Corp., No. 7:09-CV-29-O, 2011 WL 7575006, at *5-6 (N......