The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
As you heard, the patent examination process by the Patent Office is not perfect. Patent examiners do not have full access to what others have patented or published before, and the law says you cannot patent what others have already published or patented. Only a small percentage of issued patents are ever asserted in a litigation like this one, and so our system permits a more in-depth examination of a patent in litigation.
There are additional defenses against patent infringement claims that the video did not explain. For example, a patent must describe the claimed invention in sufficient detail to show the inventor really had made the invention and to enable others in the industry to make and use the invention without undue experimentation. Patent claims that do not meet those requirements are invalid.
You must decide the issues according to the instructions I give you. In general, the following are the issues you must decide:
(a) Whether CAP-XX has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Maxwell has infringed any one or more of the asserted patent claims, which are claims 12, 16-18, 20, 22, 43, 48-51, & 62 of the '034 Patent or
claims 8 or 9 '600 Patent;
(b) Whether Maxwell has proved by clear and convincing evidence that any one or more of the asserted patent claims are invalid;
(c) Whether CAP-XX has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that
any infringement you find was willful; and
(d) What amount of damages that CAP-XX has proved by a preponderance of the evidence would compensate CAP-XX if you find CAP-XX proved infringement of one or more claims that Maxwell has not proved to be invalid.
I am going to give you an overview of who the parties are and what each contends. The Plaintiff in this case is CAP-XX, LTD, which I will refer to as Plaintiff or CAP-XX. The Defendant in this case is Maxwell Technologies, Inc., which I will refer to as Defendant or Maxwell.
CAP-XX alleges that Maxwell infringes two U.S. Patents. The first is U.S. Patent No. 6,920,034, which will often be referred to as the '034 Patent. The second is U.S. Patent No. 7,382,600, which will often be referred to as the '600 Patent. The patents in this lawsuit relate to charge storage devices, commonly called supercapacitors or electrochemical double layer supercapacitors (or "EDLCs").
Maxwell denies that it has infringed the asserted claims of these patents and contends that the asserted claims are invalid.
I will now show you a video from the Federal Judicial Center called "The Patent Process: An Overview for Jurors." You are being provided a copy of the sample patent referenced in the video.
[VIDEO TO BE PLAYED]
Thank you for your attention. Although the video you just watched provides a good background on the patent system, it does not explain all of the considerations you will have to weigh in making your decisions in this case.
Members of the jury:
Now that you have been sworn, I have the following preliminary instructions for guidance on your role as jurors in this case.
These instructions are intended to assist you in discharging your duties as jurors and to introduce you to the case and the law that you will apply to the evidence that you will hear. Also, because this case involves patents, I will give you some preliminary instructions regarding patents to assist you in discharging your duties. I will give you more detailed instructions on the law at the end of the trial.
You will hear the evidence, decide what the facts are, and then apply those facts to the law that I will give to you. You and only you will be the judges of the facts. You will have to decide what happened. I play no part in judging the facts. My role is to be the judge of the law. I make whatever legal decisions have to be made during the course of the trial, and I will explain to you the legal principles that must guide you in your decisions. You must follow that law whether you agree with it or not. It is important that you perform your duties fairly. Do not let any bias, sympathy, or prejudice influence your decision in any way. You should not take anything I may say or do during the trial as indicating what I think of the evidence or what your verdict should be.
So the instructions to jury is a 21 page document that was read out in the court to the jury, as well as showing some videos of the background of patent infringement. This is EXCELLENT, because as noted below this means the Alice test point 1 did not fall in Maxwell's favour and the trial is now in full flow.
Quotes from the document to follow....
So much for the £5 valuation the board kept banging on about.
I expect we will see docket updates this evening.
Nothing leaking from the courts yet.
Some quotes from the judges order this evening:
"The Court, having considered the parties’ arguments in their respective letters, rejects both proposals, and declines to further instruct the jury regarding these terms."
"The real dispute between the parties is about enablement, not claim construction. "
"Defendant’s proposed construction appears to be an attempt to prevent Plaintiff from making that enablement argument, but the law permits Plaintiff to make that argument to the jury."
"Chief Judge Connolly denied Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of no enablement because he concluded that there was a “disputed fact” about whether a person of skill in the art “would [] be able to determine an upper limit on the power performance metrics recited in asserted claim."
Nice buy there, will it move up this afternoon?
Mucker you are making the assumption that companies won't buy Cap-XX products while they are being sued. This has already been shown not to be true with recent purchase orders. Also Ionic are happy to go in partnership with Cap-XX to sell their technology.
Mucker changing his mind yet again. Just last week he thought the sp wouod go to 8p and now he's saying it's game over for CPX.
Parkez let me ask you then. WHY HAVE CAP-XX AGREED TO LET THE COURT DECIDE THE ALICE TEST.
The directors also replied with an immediate No when the queation was asked that Maxwell have already made an offer, rather than the usual, we can't discuss the case.
Parkez - No! The directors made it clear in the recent investor meeting that the cases are independent. The Maxwell case will be concluded next week and the Tesla case will be ongoing as a separate case which CAP-XX are willing to fight.
Furthermore if memory serves me right, the Alice test was fundamental to CAP-XX winning agsinst CDE and Ioxus.
It could be a very short trial.
Very interesting development in the trial. Hasn't Maxwell already this argumemt partly dismissed?
306. ORAL ORDER: Having reviewed the parties' Proposed Verdict Sheet (D.I. [292]), and it appearing that Defendant is asserting as a defense that the patent claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. � 101, and it further appearing that the parties agree that step one of the Alice test is an issue that should be resolved by the Court (not the jury) (D.I. [292] at 15-16), IT IS ORDERED that, should Defendant continue to press its � 101 defense, the Court will hear oral argument on Alice step one at December 11, 2023, at 8:30 A.M. Lead counsel from each side shall be allotted up to 10 minutes to present argument. Ordered by Judge Jennifer L. Hall on 12/7/2023. (filed: 12/07/2023)
They will have learned a lot from the legal cases over the past few years so anyone trying to sidestep these patents will not get away with it for so long tbis time.
Yes great news, this opens up new license and royalty stream opportunities.
Court update: No settlement. Trial going ahead as planned. Final frial and jury instructons to be agreed over the next 2 days.
Looks like Mucker had my post removed - he can't handle the truth!