Judge Prost noted that Google’s arguments regarding the unreliability of Kennedy’s analysis were valid, pointing out that it failed to meet legal standards.
In the dissent, Judge Prost highlighted that the majority opinion on damages could potentially both confuse existing precedents and create contradictions within established legal frameworks.
The CAFC agreed to a rare en banc rehearing to reassess the earlier decision, particularly focusing on the district court's adherence to legal standards concerning damages.
Following a jury’s decision that upheld EcoFactor’s claims of infringement, Google’s attempts to review the factual findings of the district court were met with rejection by the CAFC.
Collection
[
|
...
]