The prevailing defendant in this copyright case sought an award of fees under 17 U.S.C. § 505. Judge Gilstrap’s opinion sorted through the claims and the parties’ alleged conduct in the case before finally determining the appropriateness of an award of fees, thus giving parties some guidance on when an award of fees in a copyright case is appropriate.
Judge Mazzant granted the application for fees and costs only in part, finding the request inadequately supported as fees. Accordingly, the prevailing plaintiff only recovered its costs.
The court awarded fees to the defendant in this copyright case, then had to determine how to apportion them.
Following a trial which resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff on a breach of contract claim, the plaintiff sought fees and costs.
This fee award is a good example of how not to prosecute a patent case.
The question was whether the losing plaintiff could obtain fees for defeating the counterclaims in this trademark case.
This finding followed a default judgment, but provides useful analysis.
This case provides a good example of what an application for fees should contain.
The court concluded that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant, and transferred the case to the SDNY.
Sad moment Thursday saying goodbye to Lady at Baylor. Not as sad as the plaintiff after this dismissal with fees.
