The Federal Circuit ruled on the Halo v. Pulse patent infringement case, affirming the district court's decisions regarding enhanced damages, attorney fees, and prejudgment interest after 18 years of litigation. Judge Bryson's opinion emphasized the denial of a new damages trial while also touching on the contentious issue of punitive damages. The author argues that the ruling improperly downplays the importance of the jury's willfulness finding, which should meaningfully influence the decision on enhanced damages, rather than be treated as a mere checkbox in the litigation process.
The Federal Circuit's ruling on enhanced damages in Halo v. Pulse raises questions about the significance of jury findings on willfulness and their impact on the punitive damages awarded.
After extensive litigation, the Federal Circuit missed an opportunity to address how a jury's willfulness verdict should genuinely influence enhanced damages, reducing it to a mere procedural formality.
Collection
[
|
...
]