United States Federal Circuit

In a patent dispute involving the Roundup system for weed control that uses genetically modified crops, a judgment awarding damages to plaintiff for defendant's patent infringement, rejecting defendant's arguments for vacating a judgment of liability, and refusing plaintiff's request to modify a permanent injunction, is affirmed over claims that: 1) plaintiff's withdrawal of a patent infringement claim undermined the rationale of a prior decision of the circuit court and required revisiting defendant's defenses and counterclaims; 2) the damages award grossly exceeded the amount that was justified, and plaintiff's expert should not have been allowed to testify regarding the reasonable royalty amount; and 3) the district court erred as to the scope of an injunction against defendant.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/24/2007
• Published 05/25/2007

Judges

• BRYSON, Circuit Judge., Before LOURIE, RADER, and BRYSON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Paul R.Q. Wolfson, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-cross appellant.   With him on the brief were Seth P. Waxman, Shirley Cassin Woodward, and Gregory H. Lantier.   Of counsel on the brief was Joseph C. Orlet, Husch & Eppenberger, LLC, of St. Louis, MO.


• For Appellees:
  
• Mark A. Lemley, Keker & Van Nest, L.L.P., of San Francisco, CA, argued for defendant-appellant.  Jim D Waide, III, Waide & Associates, P.A., of Tupelo, MS, for defendant-appellant.   Of counsel was Alan B. Morrison, Stanford Law School, of Stanford, CA.