Newegg denied attorneys’ fees in patent dispute

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has rejected online retailer Newegg’s request for attorneys’ fees in its patent dispute with licensing company Site Update Solutions.

The disputed patent covers a process for maintaining the registration of a web page on a search engine.

In 2010, Site Update sued 39 companies, including Newegg, at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. All parties settled, except for Newegg.

The case was later transferred to the US District Court for the Northern District of California.

Following a Markman hearing, both parties filed to dismiss the case with prejudice.

The court agreed and Newegg later filed a motion seeking its attorneys’ fees arguing that Site Update had been unreasonable in asserting its claim.

The district court dismissed Newegg’s claims. Newegg appealed against the decision and the federal circuit remanded the case back to the district court following the US Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Octane Fitness v Icon Health & Fitness.

Under Octane, the Supreme Court relaxed the standard on awarding attorneys’ fees to prevailing parties and said courts can award legal costs in “exceptional” cases.

However, the district court held firm in denying Newegg’s plea for its legal costs to be awarded prompting Newegg to appeal to the federal circuit again.

In a ruling handed down on Monday, February 1, the federal circuit upheld the district court’s ruling.

Judge Jimmie Reyna said that Newegg’s request was a step too far for the court.

“Newegg essentially urges this court to adopt a de novo review of the district court’s findings.

“Our review is limited to determining whether the district court based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law or on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence,” he said.