Author name: Western District

Presumably this news has already reached most interested readers, but to put a bow on the blog’s trial coverage, the jury’s verdict in VLSI-Intel III broke the existing 1-1 tie in favor of plaintiff VLSI. Yesterday afternoon the jury came back with an infringement verdict on VLSI’s single asserted patent, with a corresponding damages award of a $947.8M “[r]unning royalty in the form of a lump sum for past damages only.” The jury also found both asserted claims not invalid. This is the second large plaintiffs’ verdict awarded by an Austin jury in the last couple months, following the $174.5M

After a slight delay caused by another round of Central Texas ice storms last week, trial before Judge Albright in Case No. 6:20-cv-00108-ADA, ParkerVision, Inc. v. Intel Corp. is scheduled to begin today. Our understanding is that jury selection is presently proceeding before Judge Manske, with openings presumed to follow. The docket order resetting jury selection from last week to this morning didn’t specify what time openings would be, but it’s typically been 1PM or 1:30PM for Judge Albright’s cases in which the jury is selected in the morning. Trial is scheduled for a brisk 12 hours per side, excluding openings and

Time for the next patent trial before Judge Albright. As of this writing the first witness has just taken the stand in WSOU Investments LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing & Development v. Dell Technologies Inc., Case Nos. 6:20-cv-00480, -481 & -486. Trial is scheduled for  10 [adjusted downward as of this afternoon] hours per side.  Trial proceedings on Friday will be limited to 2-2.5 hours in the morning in consideration of a funeral Judge Albright will attend that afternoon. The Court further clarified today that closings will happen next week. Public dial-in credentials are as follows: +1 669 254 5252  or +1 646 828 7666  or

Presumably this news has already reached most interested readers, but to put a bow on the blog’s trial coverage, the jury’s verdict in VLSI-Intel III broke the existing 1-1 tie in favor of plaintiff VLSI. Yesterday afternoon the jury came back with an infringement verdict on VLSI’s single asserted patent, with a corresponding damages award of a $947.8M “[r]unning royalty in the form of a lump sum for past damages only.” The jury also found both asserted claims not invalid. This is the second large plaintiffs’ verdict awarded by an Austin jury in the last couple months, following the $174.5M verdict in Voxer  v. Meta

OK, take two! As readers may recall, the third episode in the VLSI-Intel saga started to go to trial back in April, but was adjourned after just one day of proceedings following a COVID diagnosis on one of the trial teams. But now we’re back. Trial in Case No. 1:19-cv-00977-ADA will begin again, from scratch, this coming Monday, November 7. As before, this trial will occur in Austin, as compared to the first two trials (#1, #2) that went forward in Waco in February and April of 2021. Judge Albright will conduct voir dire himself on Monday morning (last time VLSI-Intel III was going to trial, Magistrate Judge Gilliland handled

It’s been a busy couple weeks for those following patent trials in the Western District of Texas! First, on Wednesday came the jury’s verdict in Austin, in Voxer, Inc. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. This was the first patent trial before Judge Yeakel in the post-COVID timeframe during which we’ve been compiling our Texas IP Trial Tracker. The trial was overall an eight-day proceeding, rolling over from the week prior: voir dire Monday 9/12; openings Tuesday 9/13; close of evidence Monday 9/19; summations Tuesday 9/20; and verdict Wednesday 9/21. The jury’s verdict found that Meta’s Facebook Live and Instagram Live products infringed six asserted

On September 16, 2022, the Court updated its Standing Order Governing Proceedings (OGP) 4.2 — Patent Cases. Here are the highlights: New Contact Information The Court updated its email addresses for the Court’s law clerks: Email address for both Judge Albright’s and Judge Gilliland’s law clerks: TXWDml_LawClerks_WA_JudgeAlbright&Gilliland@txwd.uscourts.gov Email address for only Judge Albright’s law clerks: TXWDml_LawClerks_WA_JudgeAlbright@txwd.uscourts.gov Email address for only Judge Gilliland’s law clerks TXWDml_NoJudge_Chambers_WA_JudgeGilliland@txwd.uscourts.gov.   Discovery Disputes The Court updated its Standing Referral so that discovery disputes in patent cases pending before the Judge Albright are referred to Judge Gilliland. Regarding the summary of the discovery dispute issue to the

This week’s trial in front of Judge Albright is Ravgen, Inc. v. Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings, Case No. 6:20-cv-00969-ADA. Openings recently concluded, and the first witness will be taking the stand momentarily. (Judge Gilliland conducted voir dire on Thursday.) Each party is working with a time limit of 10 hours (plus an hour for opening and summation). Plaintiff Ravgen is represented by Desmarais and Texas counsel Deron Dacus. Defendant Lab Corp. is represented by counsel from Wilson Sonsini, Kilpatrick Townsend, and Reed Smith. The Court’s notice of trial procedures again includes public dial-in credentials: +1 669 254 5252  or +1 646 828

Friday afternoon 8/28 the jury in NCS Multistage v. TCO returned its verdict. For the second time (after January’s infringement verdict), NCS prevailed, with the jury finding that TCO had both induced infringement of and contributorily infringed the asserted ’445 patent with respect to all accused products. The jury also found that the ’445 patent was not invalid. As to damages, the jury’s award was $1,928,400. For reasons known only to the jury, that figure is almost exactly 4/7 between the parties’ respective damages positions ($3.15M for plaintiff NCS, $300K for defendant TCO). [This post was drafted with intent to post on the day