ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Seattle Trademark Lawyer

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Intellectual Property Law

: Seattle Trademark Lawyer

Failure to Attribute Fees to Lanham Act Claim Not Fatal to Fees Award

By Michael Atkins

ADVERTISEMENTS

EchoStar Satellite Corp. sued NDS Group PLC in the Central District of California, alleging that NDS had engaged in unfair business practices that compromised EchoStar’s security system, resulting in millions of dollars in damages.

After half a decade of litigation and a four week trial, the jury found for EchoStar in the amount of $45.69.

This, the district court determined, meant that NDS was the prevailing party, including on EchoStar’s Lanham Act claims. However, the court did not award any fees on those claims.

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit considered the fees award in light of the fact the district court did not carve out any time that NDS spent defending against EchoStar’s Lanham Act claims. However, that didn’t seem to bother the Ninth Circuit since the Lanham Act claims were intertwined with the core claims in the case and the district court reduced NDS’ claimed fees by 25%.

“The district court properly disallowed NDS’s request for attorneys’ fees under the Lanham Act but did not attempt to segregate the award of attorney time devoted to the defense of these claims. We note, however, that the Lanham Act claims were denied on a motion for summary judgment that devoted only two pages of briefing to them. Since the operative facts forming the basis of the Lanham Act claims were intertwined with the rest of EchoStar’s claims and required minimal legal argument to achieve their dismissal, we see no practical reason to ask the district court to attempt to separate out the attorneys’ fees attributable to them. We will instead consider them to fall within the 25% reduction of NDS’s fees ordered by the district court.”

The case cite is EchoStar Satellite Corp. v. NDS Group PLC, 2010 WL 3034603, Nos. 09-55005 and 09-55633 (Ninth Cir. Aug. 4, 2010).

Full post as published by Seattle Trademark Lawyer on August 10, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0023 secs (from cache 11/02/26 19:18:18)