Fed Circuit orders Blackbird to pay attorney fees for 'frivolous' litigation
An IP solutions company must pay the attorney fees of the companies it sued because of its “unreasonable” litigation tactics, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled.
In a precedential decision, issued yesterday, December 16, the court affirmed the US District Court for the Central District of California’s decision that Blackbird Tech must pay wellness companies Health In Motion and Leisure Fitness Equipment $363,243 to cover attorney fees and expenses.
The Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s decision that Blackbird’s litigation position was “unreasonable”, “meritless” and “frivolous”, finding that Blackbird had raised flawed claim construction and infringement contentions.
The dispute dates to October 2016, when Blackbird sued the companies for allegedly infringing one of its patents (US number 6,705,976), which covers exercise equipment.
During months of litigation, Blackbird made a number of decreasing settlement offers to the parties, but they declined.
Health In Motion and Leisure Fitness Equipment stated that Blackbird’s “infringement allegations lacked merit in view of the substantial differences between what is claimed in the ’976 patent and the accused device”.
Additionally, they asserted that Blackbird should be liable to pay their attorney fees and asked the court for a summary judgement.
In May 2018, the evening before the case was set to go to trial at the district court, Blackbird filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without notifying the parties. The court accepted the dismissal, but ordered Blackbird to pay the costs.
In its decision, the Federal Circuit relied on an earlier statute which states that a court may award attorney fees in exceptional cases.
It said the district court was correct to grant attorney fees in this case to deter future abusive litigation.
Additionally, it noted that Blackbird had filed to dismiss the suit on the eve of the trial, and without notifying the companies it was suing.
“The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that this case stands out with respect to the lack of substantive strength in Blackbird’s litigation position, and the manner in which Blackbird litigated,” the decision said.
The Federal Circuit also upheld the finding that Blackbird unreasonably delayed in producing certain documents and withheld many documents.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today's top stories:
English High Court dismisses Babybel TM appeal
