Quantcast

Court holds off on granting $6.9 million in attorney's fees to Imperium in patent case until more documentation is submitted

SOUTHEAST TEXAS RECORD

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Court holds off on granting $6.9 million in attorney's fees to Imperium in patent case until more documentation is submitted

Patents 09

SHERMAN – The Sherman Division of the Eastern District of Texas has ruled to grant in part and deny in part a motion filed by Imperium IP Holdings LTD to stay royalties and cover court costs in its continuing patent infringement against Samsung Electronics Co. LTD.

The order was filed Sept. 13. The court granted Imperium its non-taxable fees of $581,681.44 but has denied its claim for $6.9 million in attorney's fees. However, the denial was issued with the order that Imperium submit documentation to determine its attorney’s fees for further review.

The plaintiffs filed legal action against Samsung for infringing on three separate patents that photo capture technology. Though not described in the order itself, reports state that the patents covered a way to take photos in various types of lighting including strobe and fluorescent.

The court's memorandum and order states that in February 2016, a jury awarded in part damages to Imperium including $4.8 million for one patent and $2.12 million for another. A third patent infringement was determined invalid for obviousness. Additionally, the jury granted a 4 cent royalty rate for the first patent and a 2 cent royalty rate for the second per product. The court later awarded enhanced damages in August 2016, leading the plaintiffs to file their current motion for attorney’s fees and non-taxable fees in May 2017.

The memorandum and order issued by the court states that the precedent for whether attorney and nontaxable fees are granted is determined by if the case itself is merited as exceptional. In the analysis laid out in the order, the court claims the case is in fact exceptional due to the “unreasonable conduct of the defendants.” 

The memorandum states that in false testimony given by two witnesses for the defense, it was found that Samsung was allegedly fully aware of Imperium’s patents even going so far as to track them in other litigation and purchase them through a patent broker. In addition, Samsung was accused by the courts of making several misrepresentations and routinely filing late paperwork.

More News