Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
11PatentTrollsContinuedfromPage10creativeandflexiblecasemanagementtechniquesthatmakeiteasiertoidentifymeritlesscasesearlyonoratleastnarrowandrefinetheissuesinwaysthatmakepatentinfringementactionsmoreamena-bletosettlementorsummaryadjudication.AndofcoursetheFederalCircuitwillcontinuetomakefurtherimportantrefinementsinthepatentlaw.WithoutadoubtPAEsandpatentreformwillcon-tinuetobethefocusofintenseinterestanddebate._____________________________________1MichaelJ.StimsonandMarthaK.GoodingarepartnersinJonesDaysIrvineCaliforniaoffice.TheviewsexpressedherearetheauthorsandnotthoseofJonesDayitsclientsortheFBAOC.TheauthorsthanktheircolleagueMichelleStoverforherassistanceinpreparingthisarticle.2httpwww.whitehouse.govthe-press-office20130604fact-sheet-white-house-task-force-high-tech-patent-issues.3JamesBessenandMichaelJ.MeurerTheDirectCostsfromNPEDisputesBostonUniv.SchoolofLawWorkingPaperNo.12-342012availableathttpwww.bu.edulawfacultyscholarshipworkingpapers2012.html.4RandallR.RaderChiefJudgeoftheUnitedStatesCourtofAppealsfortheFederalCircuitTheStateofPatentLitigationAddressattheE.D.TexasJudicialConferenceSeptember272011availableathttpwww.patentlyo.comfilesraderstateofpatentlit.pdf.5SeePRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERSLLP2012PatentLitigationStudyLitigationContinuestoRiseAmidGrowingAwarenessofPatentValue.72012httpwww.pwc.comen_USusforensic-servicespublicationsassets2012-patent-litigation-study.pdf.6SeeTheTop100Verdictsof2012THENATIONALLAWJOURNALMarch42012at14citingCarnegieMellonUniv.v.MarvellTech.W.D.Pa.1.69billionApplev.SamsungN.D.Cal.1.04billionMonsantov.duPontE.D.Mo.1billion.OfcoursenotalltheseverdictssurvivedJMOLmo-tionsintact.7Rilesv.ShellExplorationandProd.Co.298F.3d13021311Fed.Cir.2002.8LucentTechs.Inc.v.GatewayInc.580F.3d13011325Fed.Cir.2009citationomitted.9PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERSLLPsupranote4at711.10ResQNet.comInc.v.LansaInc.594F.3d860869Fed.Cir.2010.11RiteHiteCorp.v.KelleyCo.Inc.56F.3d15381549Fed.Cir.1995citationomittedWehaveheldthattheentiremarketvaluerulepermitsrecoveryofdamagesbasedonthevalueofapatenteesentireapparatuscontainingseveralfea-tureswhenthepatent-relatedfeatureisthebasisforcustomerdemand.UnilocUSAInc.v.MicrosoftCorp.632F.3d12921320Fed.Cir.2011TheSupremeCourtandthiscourtsprecedentsdonotallowconsiderationoftheentiremarketvalueofaccusedproductsforminorpatentimprove-mentssimplybyassertingalowenoughroyaltyrate....Fortheentiremarketvalueruletoapplythepatenteemustprovethatthepatent-relatedfeatureisthebasisforcustomerde-mandcitationsomitted.12LaserDynamicsInc.v.QuantaComputer694F.3d5167-68Fed.Cir.2012.13Uniloc632F.3dat1315Evidencerelyingonthe25per-centruleofthumbisthusinadmissibleunderDaubertandtheFederalRulesofEvidencebecauseitfailstotieareasonableroyaltybasetothefactsofthecaseatissue.14Seee.g.ResQNet.com594F.3dat868-874LucentTechs.580F.3dat1327-28.15Seee.g.InreEMCCorp.677F.3d13511355Fed.Cir.2012.16SeeNormanIPHoldingsLLCv.LexmarkInternationalInc.No.11-cv-00495ECFNo.253at6-10E.D.Tex.Aug.102012forChiefJudgeLeonardE.Davisexplanationofhowpretrialconsolidationpromotesjudicialefficiency.17SeeCEATSInc.v.ContlAirlinesInc.No.610-cv-00120Dkt.No.888E.D.Tex.Feb.142012orderdenyingmotionforseparatetrials.18UNITEDSTATESPATENTANDTRADEMARKOFFICEPATENTEXAMINERS2013availableathttpwww.uspto.govdashboardspatentskpiskpiExaminers.kpixml.Onecommen-tatorhassuggestedhoweverthatgivenhighattritionratesamongexaminersatthepatentofficethislevelofnewhireswilldonomorethanallowthepatentofficetokeepeven.MarkA.LemleyFixingthePatentOfficeinINNOVATIONPOLICYANDTHEECONOMY8389JoshLernerandScottSterneds.2013.19ChristopherAnthonyCotropiaet.al.PatentApplicationsandthePerformanceoftheU.S.PatentandTrademarkOfficeRichmondSchoolofLawIntellectualProp.Inst.ResearchPaperNo.2013-012013availableathttpssrn.comabstract2225781.20PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERSLLPsupranote4at6.21RyanDavis7thCirc.sPosnerCallsForCrackdownonPa-tentProliferationLAW360May142013httpwww.law360.comarticles439755.22SeeMarkA.Lemleysupranote17at84.