Opinion ID: 212477
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Attorney Fees Award

Text: On April 17, 2009, Cornell filed a motion in district court asking that the case be declared exceptional and that it be awarded attorney fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285. On February 2, 2010, the district court granted the motion, and awarded Cornell attorney fees and related travel and out-of-pocket expenses in the amount of $183,517.11. The court also awarded Cornell its costs of $13,111.53 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920. Attorney Fees Decision, 2010 WL 446199, at -7, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8756, at -22. Although it determined that the case was exceptional, the trial court held that Cornell was only entitled to recover attorney fees for the portion of the infringement litigation following the September 26, 2007, Crookston deposition. Id. at , 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8756, at . The court concluded that Old Reliable may have had some basis for its contention that the VT-2 product did not anticipate the '950 patent prior to this deposition. Id. at , 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8756, at . The case became exceptional, however, after Crookston admitted in deposition that the VT-2 . . . did the same thing as his invention. Id. at , 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8756, at . After this testimony, it was apparent that [the '950] patent was anticipated and any further action against Cornell for infringement was baseless. Id. at , 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8756, at . In the court's view, Old Reliable's decision to maintain its infringement action following Crookston's deposition was improper and unjustified and warranted a finding of an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Attorney Fees Decision, 2010 WL 446199, at , 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8756, at .