Evolving State of § 101 Case Law Weighs Against Attorneys’ Fees under § 285

May 13, 2016

Reading Time : 1 min

Afterward, the defendant filed a motion for attorneys’ fees under § 285, alleging that the case was exceptional because plaintiff “knew its claims were objectively invalid over the prior art.” In its motion denying attorneys’ fees, the court noted that it had expended considerable effort in reaching its invalidity determination, and that “the § 101 analysis is an evolving state of the law and a difficult exercise.” Accordingly, the court was not persuaded that plaintiff’s claims were exceptionally meritless, particularly in light of the changing landscape of § 101.

YYZ LLC v. Pegasystems Inc., 1-13-cv-00581 (D. Del. May 2, 2016).

Share This Insight

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.