United States Federal Circuit

In a patent case involving drive trains for hybrid electric vehicles, a judgment finding that defendant-Toyota infringed certain patent claims under the doctrine of equivalents, that Toyota did not literally infringe certain claims, and imposing an ongoing royalty arrangement is affirmed in part, but vacated in part insofar as it relates to the imposition of an ongoing royalty at a rate of $25 per infringing vehicle.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/18/2007
• Published 10/18/2007

Judges

• Before LOURIE, RADER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Ruffin B. Cordell, Fish & Richardson P.C., of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-cross appellant.   With him on the brief were Ahmed J. Davis and Scott A. Elengold.   Of counsel on the brief was Robert E. Hillman, of Boston, MA.


• For Appellees:
  
• George E. Badenoch, Kenyon & Kenyon, of New York, NY, argued for defendants-appellants.   With him on the brief were John Flock and Thomas R. Makin.   Of counsel on the brief was T. Cy Walker, of Washington, DC.