throbber
Case 2:14-cv-00111-AJS Document 404 Filed 06/12/15 Page 1 of 3
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`
`
`
`
`
`14cv0111
`ELECTRONICALLY FILED
`
`
`
`DRONE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PARROT S.A., PARROT, INC.,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`ORDER OF COURT RE: POST-TRIAL DAMAGES MOTIONS
`(DOC. NOS. 378, 380, 382, 383, 386)
`
`AND NOW, this 12th day of June, 2015, for the reasons set forth in a previously filed
`
`
`
`
`
`Memorandum Opinion Re: Post-Trial Damages Motions, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT1:
`
`1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Royalty for Future Infringement (Doc. No. 378) is DENIED. The
`
`Court adopts the jury’s verdict of $4,016,050.00 for infringement of Plaintiff’s patents
`
`from July 1, 2015 through the expiration of the patents -- future damages;
`
`2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Fees Under Rule 37 (Doc. No. 380) is GRANTED;
`
`
`
`On or before June 25, 2015, Plaintiff shall file a Petition pursuant to Federal Rule
`
`of Civil Procedure 37, for reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses, for Defendants’ non-
`
`compliance with this Court’s Orders. Defendants’ Response thereto is due by July 8,
`
`2015. David White, Esq. is appointed as Special Master to recommend the amount of a
`
`reasonable award pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 under the applicable
`
`standard.
`
`
`1 Nothing in this Order is meant to prohibit the Parties from reaching agreement as to the amounts of the
`awards. However, due to the unprecedented lack of agreement on any issue in this case, the Court’s
`Order is structured such that customary Joint Status Reports etc. are not provided required.
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00111-AJS Document 404 Filed 06/12/15 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`To the extent applicable, Mr. White is appointed subject to the same terms as the
`
`Court’s previous Order of Court Appointing Special Master Re: Attorney-Client Privilege
`
`and Attorney Work Product Dispute (Doc. No. 179). The Special Master shall file a
`
`Report and Recommendation on or before July 31, 2015;
`
`3. Plaintiff’s Motion for an Order Awarding Pre-judgment Interest (Doc. No. 382) is
`
`GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART;
`
`
`
`Plaintiff is awarded pre-judgment interest on the jury award for past damages of
`
`$3,783,950.00, compounded quarterly, using Pennsylvania’s statutory interest rate of six
`
`percent, from January 31, 2012 through the date of entry of judgment. Pre-judgment
`
`interest will also be awarded, in the same manner, on Plaintiff’s award for attorneys’ fees
`
`and expenses, which have yet to be determined. Pre-judgment interest will not be applied
`
`as to the award for future damages;
`
`4. Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for an Exceptional Case Finding and an Award of Attorneys’
`
`Fees (Doc. No. 383) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Court
`
`finds that this case is exceptional pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285. Plaintiff’s Motion is
`
`GRANTED to the extent that it seeks an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses and
`
`DENIED to the extent Plaintiff moves this Court to award Plaintiff the costs of its expert
`
`witness;
`
`
`
`On or before June 25, 2015, Plaintiff shall file a Petition for Attorneys’ Fees and
`
`Expenses (with supporting affidavits and documents, including the number of hours and
`
`description of work per timekeeper and the rate per hour of each timekeeper), with
`
`Response due by July 8, 2015. If Defendants oppose the amount of Plaintiff’s requested
`
`attorneys’ fees and expenses, they shall provide a document outlining Defendants’
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-00111-AJS Document 404 Filed 06/12/15 Page 3 of 3
`
`attorneys’ fees (with supporting affidavits and documents, including the number of hours
`
`and description of work per timekeeper and the rate per hour of each timekeeper) and
`
`expenses to Plaintiff’s counsel and the Special Master. David White, Esq. is appointed as
`
`Special Master to recommend the amount of reasonable attorneys’ fees under the
`
`applicable standard.
`
`
`
`To the extent applicable, Mr. White is appointed subject to the same terms as the
`
`Court’s previous Order of Court Appointing Special Master Re: Attorney-Client Privilege
`
`and Attorney Work Product Dispute (Doc. No. 179). The Special Master shall file a
`
`Report and Recommendation on or before July 31, 2015;
`
`5. Plaintiff’s Motion for Post-Judgment Interest (Doc. No. 386) is GRANTED. Defendants
`
`shall pay post-judgment interest on the damages assessed by the jury (and adopted by the
`
`Court), attorneys’ fees and costs (which will be determined with the use of Special
`
`Master White), and the total pre-judgment interest, at the rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. §
`
`1961(a), compounded annually from the date final judgment is entered until the total
`
`monetary amount is fully paid to Plaintiff.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s/ Arthur J. Schwab
`Arthur J. Schwab
`United States District Judge
`
`
`
`cc:
`
`All Registered ECF Counsel and Parties
`
`
`
`3

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket