The Price of "Junk Science": "Exceptional" Fees Awarded for Litigation Misconduct
Defendants should not feel vulnerable and without recourse when faced with fending off infringement claims that lack technical merit. In MarcTec, LLC v. Johnson & Johnson and Cordis Corp., the Federal Circuit sounded a warning note to plaintiffs against overreaching in patent infringement allegations with reliance on questionable expert testimony to support their infringement arguments. Affirming the trial court's decision, the Federal Circuit held that MarcTec's disregard for the district court's claim construction, misrepresentation of case law, and reliance on "untested and untestable" "junk science," supported a finding of "subjective bad faith" and "objective baselessness," and affirmed the lower court's award of approximately US$4 million in attorneys' and experts' fees and costs.
Click here to download PDF.
This publication is provided for your convenience and does not constitute legal advice. This publication is protected by copyright.
© 2012 White & Case LLP