`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-00230-JRG
`
`§§§§§§§§§§§§§
`
`PACKET INTELLIGENCE LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`NETSCOUT SYSTEMS, INC.,
`TEKTRONIX COMMUNICATIONS,
`TEKTRONIX TEXAS, LLC,
`
`Defendants.
`
`FINAL JUDGMENT
`
`A jury trial commenced in this case on October 10, 2017 and evidence closed on October
`
`13, 2017. (Dkt. Nos. 239-42.). Following submission of the evidence to the jury and while the
`
`jury deliberated, a bench trial was conducted as to the equitable issues and concluded on
`
`October 13, 2017. (Dkt. No. 242.) The jury returned a verdict on October 13, 2017, finding that
`
`Defendants NetScout Systems, Inc., Tektronix Communications, and Tektronix Texas, LLC
`
`(collectively “Defendant” or “NetScout”) willfully infringed Claims 10 and 17 of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 6,665,725, Claims 1 and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 6,839,751, and Claims 19 and 20 of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,954,789 (collectively the “Asserted Claims”); that none of the Asserted Claims
`
`were invalid; and that Plaintiff Packet Intelligence LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Packet Intelligence”)
`
`was entitled to damages in the amount of $5.75 million dollars as a running royalty. (Dkt. No.
`
`237.)
`
`Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in accordance with the
`
`Packet Intelligence Ex. 2059 Page 1 of 3
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00230-JRG Document 307 Filed 09/07/18 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 20072
`
`jury’s unanimous verdict and the entirety of the record, the Court hereby ORDERS and
`
`ENTERS JUDGMENT as follows:
`
`
`
`1. Defendant NetScout has directly infringed the Asserted Claims.
`
`2. The Asserted Claims are not invalid.
`
`3. Plaintiff is hereby AWARDED COMPENSATORY DAMAGES against Defendant
`
`and shall accordingly have and recover from Defendant the sum of $5,750,000 U.S.
`
`Dollars.
`
`4. Plaintiff Packet Intelligence is the prevailing party.
`
`5. As explained in the concurrently issued Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Enhanced
`
`Damages and Entry of Judgment and pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, Plaintiff is hereby
`
`AWARDED ENHANCED DAMAGES against Defendant and shall further have and
`
`recover from Defendant the sum of $2,800,000 U.S. Dollars.
`
`6. As explained in the concurrently issued Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Pre- and Post-
`
`Judgment Interest and pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, Plaintiff is AWARDED PRE-
`
`JUDGMENT INTEREST in the amount calculated at the five-year U.S. Treasury Bill
`
`rate, compounded monthly, adjusting the effective rate with each and every change in said
`
`five-year U.S. Treasury Bill rate from the date of first infringement.
`
`7. As explained in the concurrently issued Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Pre- and Post-
`
`Judgment Interest and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961, the Court AWARDS PLAINTIFF
`
`POST-JUDGMENT INTEREST on all sums awarded herein, at the statutory rate, from
`
`the entry of this Final Judgment until paid.
`
`8. As explained in the concurrently issued Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Enhanced
`
`Damages and Entry of Judgment and pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285, the Court finds the
`
`Packet Intelligence Ex. 2059 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00230-JRG Document 307 Filed 09/07/18 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 20073
`
`case is NOT EXCEPTIONAL.
`
`9. As explained in the concurrently issued Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Ongoing
`
`Royalty, THE ONGOING ROYALTY RATE IN THIS CASE IS HEREBY SET
`
`AT 1.55% of the revenue received by Defendant produced by the post-verdict
`
`infringing conduct (use, sales, offers for sale, or importation into the United States) of
`
`the accused G10 and GeoBlade products through the life of the asserted patents.
`
`10. As reflected in the Court’s previously issued Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
`
`(Dkt. No. 298), the Court concludes that Defendant has failed to show that the Asserted
`
`Claims are ineligible under § 101.
`
`11. As explained in the concurrently issued Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the
`
`Court concludes that Defendant has failed to show that the Asserted Claims are barred
`
`under the doctrines of either unclean hands or inequitable conduct, and accordingly
`
`the affirmative defenses of unclean hands and inequitable conduct are denied and
`
`dismissed.
`
`12. All other relief requested by either party and not specifically awarded herein is
`
`DENIED. The Clerk is DIRECTED TO CLOSE the above referenced case.
`
`Packet Intelligence Ex. 2059 Page 3 of 3
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
