April 16, 2019
Authored and Edited by Connor J. Hansen; Samhitha M. Medatia; Elizabeth D. Ferrill
In Omega Patents, LLC v. CalAmp Corporation, No. 2018-1309 (Fed. Cir. April 8, 2019), the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding that the asserted claims of four patents are not invalid, affirmed a finding of infringement for a subset of the claims, remanded a finding of infringement for the remaining claims, and vacated an award of enhanced damages.
CalAmp argued that the district court’s claim construction was erroneous and that its invalidity argument would include additional prior art if the claims were correctly construed. It did not identify the additional prior art or attempt to enter it into the record. Accordingly, the Federal Circuit found CalAmp failed to satisfy the requirements of FRCP 46 and affirmed the validity finding.
The Federal Circuit also vacated and remanded findings of infringement for a subset of the asserted claims, agreeing with CalAmp that Omega failed to show direct infringement or the requisite mental state for induced infringement.
Finally, the enhanced damages award was based on a finding that “CalAmp willfully infringed a valid patent” but did not specify which claims or patents were willfully infringed. The Federal Circuit vacated the willfulness finding and the enhanced damages award because it was unclear which claims the jury believed to be willfully infringed.
Copyright © 2019 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
At the PTAB Blog
Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a
§ 325(d) EPR Denial
May 28, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.