Prism Technologies v. Sprint Spectrum L.P.
Filing
517
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees (Filing No. 481 ) is denied. Defendant's motion for oral argument (Filing No. 512 ) is denied as moot. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (GJG )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
PRISM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P., D/B/A
)
SPRINT PCS,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________)
8:12CV123
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion
(Filing No. 481) seeking attorneys’ fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
§ 285.
Defendant has filed a motion for oral argument on Prism
Technologies LLC’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C.
§ 285 (Filing No. 512).
Under that section, courts in exceptional cases “may
award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.”
U.S.C. § 285.
35
In expounding this terse statutory language, the
United States Supreme Court explained that “an exceptional case”
simply means a case “that stands out from others with respect to
the substantive strength of a party's litigating position
(considering both the governing law and the facts of the case) or
the unreasonable manner in which the case was litigated.”
Octane
Fitness, L.L.C. v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1749,
1756 (2014).
District courts have discretion is determining
“whether a case is ‘exceptional’ in the case-by-case exercise
. . . considering the totality of the circumstances.”
1756.
Id., at
The Supreme Court enumerated the following, non-exclusive
factors courts could consider, including “frivolousness,
motivation, objective unreasonableness (both in the factual and
legal components of the case) and the need in particular
circumstances to advance considerations of compensation and
deterrence.”
Id., at 1756, n.6 (citing Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.,
510 U.S. 517, 534, n.19 (1994)).
Here, Prism, as the prevailing
party, holds the burden to establish the trial was exceptional.
See id., at 1758.
After reviewing the case law and briefs, the Court
finds that this case was not exceptional.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) Plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees (Filing No.
481) is denied.
2) Defendant’s motion for oral argument (Filing No.
512) is denied as moot.
DATED this 28th day of July, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
____________________________
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?