2016年4月8日 星期五

惡名昭彰的Patent Troll全面棄守

先前報導:
東德州法官用律師費打擊Patent Troll(http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2015/12/patent-troll.html),主要有兩個手段:專利無效,以及繳付被告訴訟費用

當時的報導:
"緣起:eDekka LLC一個NPE,2014年對近130對象提出侵權告訴,使用的就是本次系爭專利,被告多半是透過網路販售物品的零售商,接著在2015年又補上89個被告。結果,這200多個被告提出請願(motion),主張系爭專利無效,原因是不符35U.S.C. 101規定,2015年9月,法院在短時間內就做出專利無效的判決。還沒完,接著,被告又提出本案符合美國專利法35U.S.C. 285條款中「特殊情況("exceptional case")」,法院應判決原告繳付各被告所支付的律師費用,結果因為兩個理由,地方法院判決原告應繳付被告的律師費用,理由包括:本案eDekka LLC原告有客觀的不合理性,以及原告以不合理理由提出訴訟。

"Defendants assert that this case should be found “exceptional” under § 285 for two reasons: (1) eDekka’s case was objectively unreasonable; and (2) eDekka litigated in an unreasonable manner. (Mot. at 7, 13.) The Court agrees.""

這個公認是Patent Troll的eDekka LLC僅有一件專利:U.S. Patent No. 6,266,674 (“the ’674 Patent”),經前次被東德州地方法院判定專利無效與繳付被告訴訟費用之後,eDekka上訴,不過,不久之後又自行撤銷上訴,表示已經放棄訴訟

故事收尾,接著就是各被告方依照法院判決提出索賠訴訟費用的訴訟,共有24個被告參與訴訟,要求eDekka繳付共39萬美元的費用。

法院計算訴訟費用的步驟(原則):判斷代理人合理花在訴訟的時間與鐘點費,以此推定合理費用。
"First, the court must determine the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation and a reasonable hourly rate for the prevailing party’s lawyers. The hourly rate and the number of hours are multiplied to determine the lodestar, a presumptively reasonable fee award."

2015年12月訴狀揭露各個被告提出的訴訟費用,如下表,這應該是訴訟的初期費用,供各位參考:


檔案來源:
http://ia600305.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.uscourts.txed.159252/gov.uscourts.txed.159252.134.0.pdf

資訊來源:
In a first, East Texas judge hits patent troll with attorneys’ fees
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/12/in-a-first-east-texas-judge-hits-patent-troll-with-attorneys-fees/

East Texas judge throws out 168 patent cases in one fell swoop
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/10/east-texas-judge-throws-out-168-patent-cases-in-one-fell-swoop/

Biggest patent troll of 2014 gives up, drops appeal
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/biggest-patent-troll-of-2014-gives-up-drops-appeal/

Ron

沒有留言: