Mytee Products Inc. v. Harris Research Inc.
Published: Mar. 27, 2010 | Result Date: Oct. 21, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 06CV01854(CAB) Verdict – Counterclaim: $36,165
Court
USDC Southern District of California
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Frederick K. Taylor
(Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP)
Anthony J. Dain
(Procopio Cory Hargreaves & Savitch LLP)
Lisel M. Ferguson
(Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP)
Defendant
Stephen H. Smith
(Yoka & Smith LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Frederick Thompson
(technical)
James K. Sakaguchi
(technical)
Defendant
Scott Cragun
(technical)
Jonathan Richards
(technical)
Facts
Plaintiff Mytee Products Inc. made a product called 'Banana Glide.' Mytee alleged three patents - Patent Nos. 6,298,577 (577), 6,266,892 (892), and 6,981,338 (338) - belonging to defendant Harris Research Inc. were invalid and that Banana Glide did not infringe on them. Harris counterclaimed for infringement of the patents-in-suit. Later, Harris dismissed its counterclaim with regards to 338 in anticipation of a prior art reference. Harris later dedicated 338 to the public.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Mytee claimed Harris' patents were invalid and that Mytee's product did not infringe on them even if they were valid. Further, Harris' patent infringement claim was an exceptional case for which attorney fees may be awarded.
DEFENDANT/COUNTER-CLAIMANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Harris claimed Mytee willfully infringed its patents and was liable for damages.
Result
The jury found that Mytee infringed on the 577 and 892 patents, but that the infringement was not willful, and awarded Harris damages of $36,165.
Other Information
FILING DATE: Sept. 13, 2006.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390