Legal Opinion
Rembrandt Wireless Technologies, LP v. Samsung Electronics Co.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided April 17, 2017No. 2016-1729PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STOLL, Circuit Judge.
A jury found that Samsung infringed Rembrandt’s asserted patents, which the jury also found not invalid over prior art cited by Samsung. The jury awarded Rembrandt $15.7 million in damages. After trial, Samsung moved for judgment as a matter of law on obviousness and damages, which the district court denied. Samsung appeals the district court’s denial of JMOL, as well as the district court’s claim construction order and an order denying Samsung’s motion to limit Rembrandt’s damages for alleged failure to mark patented articles.
Because we agree with the district court’s…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Teva Pharm. United States, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2021
- Zimmer Surgical, Inc. v. Stryker Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 2019
- Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2025
- Arctic Cat Inc. v. Bombardier Recreational Prods., Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2018
- Artec Europe S.À.R.L. v. Shenzhen Creality 3D Technology Co., Ltd., and Shenzhen Jimuyida Technology Co., Ltd.District Court, E.D. New York · 2026
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.