Beginning Next Week: InsideCounsel will become part of Corporate Counsel. Bringing these two industry-leading websites together will now give you comprehensive coverage of the full spectrum of issues affecting today's General Counsel at companies of all sizes. You will continue to receive expert analysis on key issues including corporate litigation, labor developments, tech initiatives and intellectual property, as well as Women, Influence & Power in Law (WIPL) professional development content. Plus we'll be serving all ALM legal publications from one interconnected platform, powered by, giving you easy access to additional relevant content from other InsideCounsel sister publications.

To prevent a disruption in service, you will be automatically redirected to the new site next week. Thank you for being a valued InsideCounsel reader!


Patent troll ordered to pay FindtheBest’s attorney’s fees after failed patent litigation case

Judge Denise Cote relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s recent Octane Fitness ruling in her order

Sometimes, aggressive litigation against patent trolls pays off. In December 2013, startup FindtheBest defeated non-practicing entity Lumen View Entertainment in court, ruling that the latter’s patent infringement suit was invalid. And now, the good news keeps coming for FindtheBest: Lumen View will also have to pay the company’s legal fees for the case.

On May 30, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that Lumen View will pay FindtheBest’s legal fees for the case, which the company said reached $200,000. In the ruling, District Court Judge Denise Cote called the case a “prototypical exceptional case.” She also claimed, “fee shifting in this case will serve as an instrument of justice.”

Judge Cote held the ability to hand down this “instrument of justice” as a direct result of the Supreme Court’s May ruling in Octane Fitness LLC v. Icon Health and Fitness Inc. In that case, the Court discarded the Federal Circuit’s previous test of determining attorney’s fees: discerning whether the case was “objectively baseless” and brought in “bad faith.” Instead, the Court relied on the dictionary definition of an “exceptional” case. Now, fee shifting is in the hands of a judge’s discretion.

In the FindtheBest case, Cote relied heavily on the Octane Fitness ruling. In the order (PDF provided by Ars Technica), Cote said, “This case is ‘exceptional’ under the totality of the circumstances test articulated in Octane Fitness. First, Lumen’s lawsuit against FTB was ‘frivolous’ and ‘objectively unreasonable.’” She later added that the “motivation” and “deterrence” prongs of the Octane Fitness ruling support fee shifting in this case.

FindtheBest CEO Kevin O’Connor told Ars Technica in a statement that the company is pleased with the ruling, and it intends to continue forward with a RICO anti-extortion lawsuit against Lumen View as well. “Settling would have been easier, but I couldn’t let myself give into this injustice,” O'Connor said. “We hope other companies see this as a sign that settling isn’t the only way out.”


For more on patent trolls in recent legal news, check out these InsideCounsel articles:

Is patent legislation dying in the Senate?

In-house counsel take on patent reform

Alleged patent troll claims it owns podcasting

Vermont AG wins remand regarding complaint against MPHJ Technologies

Assistant Editor

author image

Zach Warren

Zach Warren is Assistant Editor of InsideCounsel magazine, where he oversees online content submissions and administers InsideCounsel's enewsletters. Zach specializes in new media and multimedia...

Bio and more articles

Join the Conversation

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.