+ All Categories
Home > Automotive > What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Date post: 13-Sep-2014
Category:
View: 817 times
Download: 4 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Experience Mazda Zoom Zoom Lifestyle and Culture by Visiting and joining the Official Mazda Community at http://www.MazdaCommunity.org for additional insight into the Zoom Zoom Lifestyle and special offers for Mazda Community Members. If you live in Arizona, check out CardinaleWay Mazda's eCommerce website at http://www.Cardinale-Way-Mazda.com
Popular Tags:
31
“What Can Be Done About the High Costs of IP Litigation?” Speakers: Stacy L. Prall, Baker & Daniels and Nancy Tinsley of Roche Diagnostic Operations, Inc. © 2009 Baker & Daniels LLP and Roche Diagnostic Operations, Inc. These materials may not be reproduced, transmitted, or distributed without the express written consent of the authors. They are intended for information only and are not to be considered legal advice. If specific legal issues are raised by matters covered in these materials, consultation with legal counsel may be appropriate. Intellectual Property Section Intellectual Property Section Lunch & CLE – July 10, 2009 Lunch & CLE – July 10, 2009
Transcript
Page 1: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

“What Can Be Done About the High Costs of IP Litigation?” 

Speakers: Stacy L. Prall, Baker & Daniels and Nancy Tinsley of Roche Diagnostic Operations, Inc.

© 2009 Baker & Daniels LLP and Roche Diagnostic Operations, Inc.  

These materials may not be reproduced, transmitted, or distributed without the express written consent of the authors. They are intended

for information only and are not to be considered legal advice. If specific legal issues are raised by matters covered in these materials,

consultation with legal counsel may be appropriate.

Intellectual Property Section Intellectual Property Section Lunch & CLE – July 10, 2009Lunch & CLE – July 10, 2009

Page 2: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

How High Is The Cost?How High Is The Cost?

Are the costs disproportionate to the dollars at stake?

Is it higher than other types of litigation with similar amounts of money at stake?

2

Page 3: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Median Litigation Costs Patent Infringement Suit*

2001 2003 2005 2007Less Than $1 Million at Risk

End of discovery $250 $290 $350 $350Inclusive all costs $499 $500 $650 $600

$1-$25 Million at Risk

End of discovery $797 $1,001 $1,250 $1,250Inclusive all costs $1,499 $2,000 $2,000 $2,500

More Than $25 Million at Risk

End of discovery $1,508 $2,508 $3,000 $3,000Inclusive all costs $2,992 $3,995 $4,500 $5,000

*2007 AIPLA Report on the Economic Survey

33

Page 4: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Less Than$1 Million at Risk

More Than$25 Million at Risk

$1-25Million at Risk

4

Page 5: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Patent litigation is often . . .Patent litigation is often . . .

High-stakes,

Lengthy,

Demanding (e.g., extensive briefing),

Emotional

and Expensive

5

Page 6: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Why Is the Cost So High?Why Is the Cost So High? High stakes/continuing viability at

stake

Discovery-ESI, discovery disputes

Extensive briefing (injunctions, venue, Markman, SJ)

Hard-fought-lack of cooperation and civility

Experts

Technology, jury consultants, mock juries

Excessive discovery– Document collection and production

• eDiscovery• “All documents relating to . . ..”

– Depositions

Poor control over and communication with outside counsel

Delays

Runaway experts

Attitude (e.g., “Must win at all costs” “Never admit weakness”)

66

Page 7: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Discovery Costs ─ Not a New Problem

“Perhaps the greatest driving force in litigation today is discovery. Discovery abuse is a principal cause of high litigation transaction costs.  Indeed, in far too many cases, economics-and not the merits-govern discovery decisions. Litigants of moderate means are often deterred through discovery from vindicating claims or defenses, and the litigation process all too often becomes a war of attrition for all parties….”

S.Rep. No. 101-650, at 20-21, as reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6823-24 (internal citations omitted).

7

Page 8: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

The Cost of DiscoveryThe Cost of Discovery Have Read

– 70% litigation costs collecting, producing, and reviewing documents– e-discovery costs 40-40% of the total litigation budget– first-level document review 58-90% of total litigation costs

AIPLA statistics don’t support these estimates. For 2007, costs through end of discovery ranged from 50-60% of the costs through trial.*

*2007 AIPLA Report of the Economic Survey

8

Page 9: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Why Is E-Discovery So Costly?Why Is E-Discovery So Costly?

1. Multi-stage process Collect

– Collect, log, and copy content for discovery Prepare

– Restore backups, data extraction, deduplicate

– Organize documents by custodian, concept, keyword, batch, or other methodology

Review

– Review for relevance, responsiveness and privilege

Produce

– Output data to a usable format such as PDF

9

Page 10: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

2. Volume Even if companies have established Document

Retention/Deletion Policies they may not be followed with respect to ESI.

Following litigation, DuPont conducted an internal cost assessment of a single discovery request. Reviewed 75 million pages finding that more than 50% of the documents collected and reviewed were kept beyond their retention period. Cost of reviewing those “old” documents  was $12 million.       

Follow Document Retention Policies and thereby reduce the amount of information retained (as long as there is no threat of litigation or a litigation hold in place).

Why Is E-Discovery So Costly?Why Is E-Discovery So Costly?

10

Page 11: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Steps to Reduce ESI CostsSteps to Reduce ESI Costs Educate– Find the custodian of your client’s ESI and educate yourself on what they

have and how it is organized (appoint lawyer to be the so-called “CIO”) Develop a Plan with Client– Who are the relevant departments/employees who may have

discoverable information; what files are relevant Preservation– Beyond a simple hold notice, ESI requires preserving metadata, and

disabling auto-delete and backup overwriting processes Culling & Searching– Utilize agreed keyword search term lists Transparency/Documentation– Create and keep a record of the choices made and why they

were made

11

Page 12: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Key Word Search TermsKey Word Search Terms United States v. O’Keefe, 537 F. Supp. 2d 14, 24 (D.D.C. Feb. 18,

2008). Requiring expert testimony to challenge search terms. For lawyers and judges to dare opine that a certain search terms or terms would be more likely to produce information than the terms that were used is truly to go where angels fear to tread.

Equity Analytics, LLC v. Lundin, 248 F.R.D. 331 (D.D.C. Mar. 7, 2008). Requiring expert testimony to challenge search terms.

D’Onofrio v. SFX Sports Group, Inc., 2008 WL 4737202 (D.D.C. Oct. 29, 2008). Judge created his own list of terms.

Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., 250 F.R.D. 251 (D. Md. 2008). Defendants had failed to demonstrate the keyword search they performed was reasonable; they did not identify keywords selected nor the qualifications of the persons who selected them.

12

Page 13: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Can Anything Be Done About the Cost?Can Anything Be Done About the Cost?

Rule 26(f) Control over outside counsel

– Litigation plan– Budget, including staffing– Limit extensions of time

Client communication Court intervention ADR?

13

Page 14: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Rule 26 Requires the Parties to . . .Rule 26 Requires the Parties to . . .

Consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses

Consider the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case

Make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1)

Discuss any issues about preserving discoverable information

Develop and submit a proposed discovery plan

14

Page 15: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

The discovery plan must includeThe discovery plan must include(among other things):(among other things):

Changes to the timing, form or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a)

Subjects on which discovery may be needed Consider whether discovery should be conducted in

phases or limited to or focused on particular issues ESI issues Any need for limitations on discovery

15

Page 16: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Agreements not to collect and exchange certain types of documents such as voice mail, IMs, archives or backup data, metadata, foreign documents subject to foreign privacy laws, etc.

Phasing of discovery to focus on key issues Limits on the number of depositions Keywords for searches of electronic files Documents “sufficient to show” instead of all “relating to”

The discovery plan should includeThe discovery plan should include(among other things):(among other things):

16

Page 17: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

How Does Forum Choice Impact How Does Forum Choice Impact Costs?Costs?

 Local Counsel Retainer fees- (ED Tex. $5000-7500 per month)

Time to Trial-rocket dockets-cheaper as compressed schedule or more expensive due to larger team needed?

  Local Patent Rules (e.g. SD Ca., ED Tex., ND Tex.) (when in jurisdictions with no

local patent rules, CD Ca. and MD Ga.-parties can agree to follow other’s local rules)

  Knowledge of Judges-less time spent educating judges about patent practice

  Mandatory Disclosures-(e.g. ED Tex.)

  

17

Page 18: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Civility and ProfessionalismCivility and Professionalism

Does a lack of Cooperation and Professionalism among attorneys increases the cost of litigation?– Confuse advocacy with

adversarial conduct– Lack of cooperation in

discovery process• Leads to more disputes• Multiple meet and confers

(some courts require these to be in person)

• Unnecessary motions practice

18

Page 19: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Hypertherm, Inc. v. American Torch Tip Co.,Hypertherm, Inc. v. American Torch Tip Co.,207207 WL 2695323 (D.N.H. 2007) (Judge Diclerioco)WL 2695323 (D.N.H. 2007) (Judge Diclerioco)

In a ruling on a motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment in a patent infringement case, the judge reprimanded the parties for the tone used in their briefing, noting the parties had violated the level of civility that the court expects of litigants in this district. “Such conduct is not persuasive and does little to advance a party's cause. The court expects a more professional approach from counsel in future filings.”

19

Page 20: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Examples from the BriefsExamples from the Briefs From Defendant’s response brief: Had Hypertherm not

chosen its “hyper-aggressive” litigation tactics and, instead of filing this improper motion, answered the Counterclaims and allowed associated discovery to proceed, it could have avoided making the baseless argument.

Hypertherm, by precipitously filing this frivolous summary judgment motion ought to appreciate the maxim that he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword, and be sanctioned for its improper conduct.

Contributing Factor? ─ Previous litigation between these competitors, jury verdict and settlement

20

Page 21: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom CorpQualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp..2008 WL 66932 (S.D. Cal. 2008) (Magistrate Major)*2008 WL 66932 (S.D. Cal. 2008) (Magistrate Major)*

Judge issued sanctions against 6 attorneys and referred them to the CA State Bar

 Sanctions order following Judge Brewster's findings that “counsel participated in an organized program of litigation misconduct and concealment throughout discovery, trial, and post-trial….”

 Qualcomm intentionally withheld tens of thousands of emails and the attorneys “assisted, either intentionally or by virtue of acting with reckless disregard for their discovery obligations….”

The judge said she hoped this “would establish a turning point in what the Court perceives as a decline in and deterioration of civility, professionalism and ethical conduct in the litigation arena.”

* Later ruling was subsequently appealed and affirmed as duty to disclose, breach of duty, exceptional case determination. 548 F.3d 1004 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 1, 2008).

21

Page 22: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Graves v. Mazda Motor Corp.Graves v. Mazda Motor Corp.2008 WL 5070953 (W.D. Okla. 2008) (Judge Friot)*2008 WL 5070953 (W.D. Okla. 2008) (Judge Friot)*

In its answer, defendant asserted as an affirmative defense that defendant be allowed to assert a claim against plaintiff's counsel for any costs and expenses taxed to plaintiff.

 Apparently Mazda was tired of what it deemed frivolous lawsuits.  When the judge asked for briefing on why Mazda should be

permitted to raise such a defense, Mazda sought to withdraw the defense. The Court took it under advisement and issued an order noting the lack of civility:

 “[T]here is no support…for the “proposition that a lawyer's duty to his client includes a duty to engage in offensive or abusive conduct, even if that conduct falls short of being sanctionable.”

*Not a patent infringement case.

22

Page 23: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Judge's “moral” — “adherence to basic tenets of professionalism sometimes requires officers of this court to have some backbone in contending with the demands of their own clients…[t]hat requirement goes to the very essence of what it means to be a professional and not a mere tradesman.”

Would more public “reprimands” and sanctions curtail such behavior and reduce costs?

23

Page 24: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Control Over Outside CounselControl Over Outside Counsel

Litigation Plan

• An outline of what discovery, experts, briefing, etc is anticipated and the associated cost which serves as an a memorandum of understanding as to the scope of the expected litigation

• A living document subject to change after discussion of developments in the case and the need to alter the original plan

24

Page 25: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Budget • Who is on the team, level and hourly rate

• A living document to be revised as necessary

• To be compared with actual expenses

Delays • Time is money; work fills the available time

• Avoid extensions

Control Over Outside CounselControl Over Outside Counsel

25

Page 26: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

ClientCommunication

• What are the client’s goals?

• What is a realistic outcome?

• Milestones for review

CourtIntervention

• Rules 1 and 11 (see e.g., Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Maxxam, 523 F.3d 566 (5th Cir. 2008) (affirming district court finding that the FDIC pursued litigation for improper purpose of increasing costs and forcing settlement)

• Pleading requirements (e.g., Ashcroft v Iqbal, 556 U.S. __ (2009))

26

Page 27: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

ADRADR

Arbitration • Cheaper? Faster? • Rarely an option

Mediation • If early, starts the dialogue. Rarely get agreement to do early.

• Court may not compel early if one party is resistant.

27

Page 28: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Should Anything Be Done About the Cost?Should Anything Be Done About the Cost?

Is there motivation to reduce costs?

Are prohibitive costs keeping people from pursuing legitimate claims?

If efforts are made to reduce costs, does this impact a party's ability to discover highly relevant evidence that will lead to a fair and just result

28

Page 29: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

The legislature? The Supreme Court in its adoption of FRCP? The local court through local rules, case

management, sanctions? The attorneys? The parties?

Who is in the best position to reduce the cost

Who Should Do Anything About the Cost?Who Should Do Anything About the Cost?

29

Page 30: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

Thank you for your attention

All the views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of Baker & Daniels or Roche Diagnostics Operations, Inc. or any other Roche entity.

30

Page 31: What Can Be Done Ip Litigation Prall

“What Can Be Done About the High Costs of IP Litigation?” 

Speakers: Stacy L. Prall, Baker & Daniels and Nancy Tinsley of Roche Diagnostic Operations, Inc. 

Intellectual Property Section Intellectual Property Section Lunch & CLE – July 10, 2009Lunch & CLE – July 10, 2009


Recommended