A prior jury verdict in favor of the client. The verdict found that a competitor unlawfully infringed upon the client's patents. Those patents were held in trust for use by the client's franchisees; and
A permanent injunction entered by the trial court. The injunction indefinitely barred the competitor from making infringing products.
By way of background, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., is unique in that its review jurisdiction is based on specific areas of law, rather than the geographic location of where the case arose. Importantly, the Federal Circuit hears all appeals from United States district courts involving patent law. So, apart from the United States Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit makes the case law that binds courts across the country in patent matters.
In our appeal, at oral argument, opposing counsel withdrew a significant portion of its arguments from consideration based on the strength of Peck Hadfield's briefing. The subsequent written opinion on the remaining issues address various aspects of patent law including: (a) patent validity due to non-anticipation; (b) application of the summary judgment burden; (c) expert witness qualification in patent cases under the "adequate relationship" standard; and (d) permanent injunction under the U.S. Supreme Court's eBay decision.
A full version of the opinion is available here.