Siemens Industry, Inc. v. Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation et al

Filing 459

MEMORANDUM ORDER setting briefing schedule for post-trial motions; Oral Argument is set for 5/28/2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6B. Signed by Judge Leonard P. Stark on 2/25/19. (ntl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
SIEMENS MOBILITY INC.
Plaintiff,
C.A. No. 16-284-LPS

V.

WESTINGHOUSE AIR BRAKE
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(d/b/a WABTEC CORPORATION) and
WABTEC RAILWAY ELECTRONICS, INC. ,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM ORDER
At Wilmington this 25th day of February, 2019:
Having reviewed the parties' joint status report (D.I. 454), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
that:
1.

Until such time as the Director of the U.S . Patent and Trademark Office issues a

certification of cancellation of any asserted patent in this case, the Patent Trial and Appeal
Board's decisions, even if "final," have no impact on this case. See 35 U.S.C. § 318(b) ("If the
Patent Trial and Appeal Board issues a final written decision .. . and the time for appeal has
expired or any appeal has terminated, the Director shall issue and publish a certificate cancelling
any claim of the patent finally determined to be unpatentable .... "); see also D.I. 454 at 1-2.
Accordingly, the Court will enter Plaintiffs' proposed form of judgment, which is consistent with
the jury verdict, including the jury' s findings of no invalidity.
2.

The parties' proposed briefing schedule for post-trial motions is ADOPTED. All

post-trial motions and opening briefs shall be filed 28 days after judgment is entered.

Responsive briefs shall be filed 28 days after opening briefs. Reply briefs shall be filed 14 days
after responsive briefs. Each side may file a single, consolidated opening brief of no more than
twenty (20) pages, a single, consolidated answering brief of no more than twenty (20) pages, and
a single, consolidated reply brief of no more than ten (10) pages.
3.

Oral argument on the post-trial motions will be heard on May 28, 2019 at 10:00

a.m. Each side will be given one (1) hour for its presentation.

4.

Defendants have properly preserved their ensnarement contention and, therefore,

it remains ripe for judicial resolution. No later than February 28, the parties shall submit a joint
status report containing their proposal(s) for how and when the Court should proceed with
respect to the ensnarement issue. In the same joint status report, the parties shall provide their
positions on any remaining disputes as to whether and when Defendants will produce updated
sales data.
5.

After a preliminary review of the parties' identification of issues on which each

intends to seek post-trial relief, and having presided over the two-week jury trial last month, the
undersigned Judge has formed tentative views as to how the forthcoming motions are likely to be
resolved. In hopes that sharing these tentative views may make briefing and resolution of those
motions more efficient, the Court states as follows:
A.

As to Plaintiff s anticipated motions, the Court is inclined to deny

enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 and attorneys' fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285,
grant supplemental damages for infringement of the asserted patents during the period from
February 26, 2018 through the entry of Final Judgment, and grant pre-judgment and postjudgment interest on damages and Siemens' recoverable costs.
2

B.

As to Defendants' anticipated motions, the Court is inclined to deny them

all, including motions for judgment of non-infringement, no lost profits on the EQT patents, no
indirect infringement of the BOS patents, and no willful infringement.
The views expressed herein are merely present inclinations and are subject to change after
full briefing on any motions that are filed.

LE LEONARD P. STARK
UNITED STATES DISTRJCT JUDGE

3