ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee v. SHOPPERSCHOICE.COM, LLC, Defendant-Appellant, 963 F.3d 1371

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-With respect to a request for attorneys' fees under 35 U.S.C.S. § 285 by defendant in a patent infringement case after one of plaintiff's patent claims was ruled ineligible under 35 U.S.C.S. § 101, the district court clearly erred by failing to address the plaintiff's manner of litigation and the broader context of the plaintiff's lawsuit against defendant, including plaintiff's history of seeking nuisance-value license fees, since these were relevant considerations; [2]-The district court also clearly erred by failing to consider the objective unreasonableness of plaintiff's alleging infringement claims; [3]-The district court applied the incorrect attorney fee statute by applying 15 U.S.C.S. § 1117 involving trademark violations instead of 35 U.S.C.S. § 285, which applied here to a patent infringement lawsuit.