RE: same story, different site...5 Sep 2022 15:53
When we start talking about damages in the billions, I find myself balking at it and going back to Edison's conservative models.
However, it does happen: it was a different situation, I know, but Intel had damages of $2.1bn awarded against it for infringing patents of VLSI Tech only last year. The court was in Waco, Texas.
I don't know what's happened subsequently in terms of appeal or settlement but the mere fact that such large awards can be made means it isn't impossible for us to achieve a similar high-end award IF there is no pre-trial settlement AND IF we win the court case.
I'd imagine a humungous award makes an appeal a certainty, providing S can justify grounds for doing so.
The story for N hasn't changed - winning most at the Markman, a clean sweep of the IPR, continued backing of the TPR and now the pending German action. S will also be unable to paint us as patent trolls which we have never been and even allowing for our confirmation bias, it looks likely S defence can't be strong. Maybe the main risk in court is that S lawyers put their side superbly while ours do diabolically but that also seems unlikely.
One point I don't understand is there have been several references to post-court settlement if we win in court. If the court makes an award, are we actually allowed to agree something different with the defendant? It almost sounds like contempt of court to do that but then I am ignorant about the process. Can somebody clarify this please? Ta.