Patent Law Practice Center

Court Vacates $626 Million Jury Verdict Due To Plaintiff’s Fundamental (And Easily Correctable) Errors

Written by Brandon Baum , of baum legal and Practice Center Contributor.

Question: How do you turn this

 

 

 

 

 

 

Into this?

 

Answer: By failing to establish each and every requirement of the patent law on the record at trial in a manner sufficient to sustain the jury’s verdict.

Mirror Worlds (MW) accused Apple of infringing three patents allegedly used in Apple’s “Cover Flow,” a feature familiar to ipod and Mac OS users. The asserted claims of the three patents-in-suit included a variety of method and system claims, and MW relied on theories of both direct and indirect infringement, and sought to prove infringement both literally and, for some limitations, under the doctrine of equivalents. The jury found infringement and awarded MW a total of $625.5 million in damages. However, the trial judge overturned that verdict and granted judgment instead to Apple. Why? Did MW overlook some subtle nuance of patent law? Was the technology just too complex for the jury to understand? No, the explanation is far far simpler than that. (more…)