Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

attorneyverdictpatentcorporationbad faith
damagesattorneyverdictpunitive damagesbad faith

Related Cases

Nike, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 138 F.3d 1437, 46 U.S.P.Q.2d 1001
View Case »
In re Barrett, 447 Mass. 453, 852 N.E.2d 660
View Case »
In re Jolles, 628 F.2d 1322, 206 U.S.P.Q. 885
View Case »
Madey v. Duke University, 307 F.3d 1351, 170 Ed. Law Rep. 164, 64 U.S.P.Q.2d 1737
View Case »
Puerto Rico Campers’ Ass’n. v. Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority, 219 F.Supp.2d 201, 33 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,033
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Manildra Milling Corp. v. Ogilvie Mills, Inc., Not Reported in F.Supp., 1993 WL 545428, 30 U.S.P.Q.2d 1020

Facts

This case involves a dispute between Manildra Milling Corporation and Ogilvie Mills, Inc. regarding the award of attorneys' fees and the correction of inventorship on certain patents. The Federal Circuit had previously affirmed the jury's verdict of invalidity and noninfringement but reversed the award of fees under the Lanham Act and state law claims. Ogilvie sought to vacate the attorneys' fees judgment and correct inventorship, while Manildra argued for the fees based on Ogilvie's alleged bad faith.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment on the jury verdict of invalidity and noninfringement, reversed the judgment on the Lanham Act and state law claims, and the accompanying award of compensatory and punitive damages, and vacated the award of attorneys' fees for reconsideration.

Issue

Rule

Analysis

Conclusion

Who won?

Ogilvie Mills, Inc. prevailed in this case as the court denied Manildra's request for attorneys' fees. The court found that the basis for the previous finding of bad faith was no longer supported by sufficient evidence following the Federal Circuit's ruling, which reversed the award of fees. As a result, Ogilvie was not found to have acted in bad faith, and thus, the court concluded that the case did not meet the exceptional standard required for an award of fees.

Ogilvie Mills, Inc. prevailed in this case as the court denied Manildra's request for attorneys' fees. The court found that the basis for the previous finding of bad faith was no longer supported by sufficient evidence following the Federal Circuit's ruling, which reversed the award of fees.

You must be