`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TEXARKANA DIVISION
`
`MAXELL LTD.,
`
`ZTE (USA) INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 5:16-cv-00179-RWS
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`
`ORDER DENYING MAXELL LTD.’S POST-TRIAL MOTIONS AND RENEWED
`MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
`Having considered Plaintiff’ Maxell Ltd.’s post-trial motions and motion for judgment as
`matter of law, and good cause appearing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
`Maxell Ltd.’s post-trial motions and motion for judgment as matter of law are DENIED.
`The Court hereby ORDERS and ENTERS JUDGMENT as follows:
` Judgment is granted for ZTE USA on counterclaim IV (claims 1- 3 of U.S. Patent
`No. 6,748,317 are invalid for failing to claim patent-eligible subject matter under
`35 U.S.C. § 101);
` Judgment is granted for ZTE USA on counterclaim XII (claims 1-2 of U.S. Patent
`No. 6,329,794 are invalid for failing to claim patent-eligible subject matter under
`35 U.S.C. § 101);
` The jury’s damages verdict is unsupported by legally sufficient evidence, and is
`vacated; no interest or costs shall be awarded;
` No pre-judgment interest shall be awarded;
` The jury’s finding that Defendant ZTE (USA), Inc. willfully infringed the
`asserted claims of the patents-in-suit is unsupported by legally sufficient evidence
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 5:16-cv-00179-RWS Document 291-21 Filed 08/28/18 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 18770
`
`under the Halo test, and is vacated. No enhanced damages shall be awarded under
`35 U.S.C. § 284; and
` The case is not exceptional, and does not stand out from others under the Octane
`test. No attorneys’ fees shall be awarded under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`2
`
`
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
