RANIERE v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Contributed by Knobbe Martens. Originally published on Patexia; republished here as part of the LexDana archive.
Federal Circuit Summary
Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Wallach. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Summary: When a case is dismissed with prejudice for lack of standing, the defendant is the prevailing party for purposes of fee-shifting under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
Mr. Raniere sued Microsoft and AT&T for patent infringement. Raniere asserted he was the sole owner of the patents-in-suit. But years earlier, Raniere and his co-inventors had assigned all rights in the patents to an entity that was dissolved before Raniere sued. Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of standing. Despite the district court providing Raniere multiple opportunities to establish his ownership interest, he failed. The district court found Rainere was “wholly incredible and untruthful,” that he demonstrated “a clear history of delay and contumacious conduct,” and was unlikely to be able to cure the standing defect. The district court dismissed the suit with prejudice and awarded Microsoft and AT&T over $440,000 in fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
On appeal, Raniere argued that Microsoft and AT&T were not prevailing parties and the district court abused its discretion finding the case exceptional. The Federal Circuit held that that Microsoft and AT&T were prevailing parties. Microsoft and AT&T “won” because the dismissal “prevented Raniere from achieving a material alteration in the relationship between them,” and the dismissal “was tantamount to a decision on the merits.” The Federal Circuit also determined the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the case exceptional and awarding defendants the majority of the requested fees.
This case is: RANIERE v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Written by: Mark Kachner and Sean S. Kim
Edited by: Paul Stewart
More insights
Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidation of Patent for Lack of Enablement of Claims Directed to a Method of Treating a Patient with a Unit Dosage in Wyeth Llc v Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals Lp
Written by : Eric Furman, Ph.D. and Ashley C. Morales Key Takeaway: Federal Circuit invalidates patent claims directed to a method for treating non-small cell lung cancer through administration of “a unit dosage” of an irreversible epidermal…
When About Becomes Indefinite Federal Circuit Provides Guidance for Life Science Patent Applications Regarding Limits of Approximation in Enviro Tech v Safe Foods
Written by : Jason J. Jardine and Kenneth O. Aruda, Ph.D. Key Takeaway: The term “about” remains useful in biotech and pharmaceutical claims, but only if the patent provides objective guidance about what the term means. Absent that guidance,…
When Any Patent Means No Patent Federal Circuit Reverses Non Specific Verdict
Written by : Brian C. Barnes and Sophia F. Zahn OLLNOVA TECHNOLOGIES LTD. v. ECOBEE TECHNOLOGIES ULC [OPINION] Before Chen , Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary : A verdict form…