Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 DECEMBER 2013

Patent Watch: CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc.

BakerHostetler
BakerHostetler
Contributor
BakerHostetler

BakerHostetler

Recognized as an innovator and one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler helps...

View firm profile
Explore more from BakerHostetler

On December 13, 2013, in "CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc.", the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded the district court judgment that CBT pay the defendants their costs.

United StatesIntellectual Property

To the extent that a party is obligated to produce (or obligated to accept) electronic documents in a particular format or with particular characteristics intact (such as metadata, color, motion, or manipulability), the costs to make duplicates in such a format or with such characteristics preserved are recoverable under [28 U.S.C. § 1920(4)]. But only the costs of creating the produced duplicates are included, not a number of preparatory or ancillary costs commonly incurred leading up to, in conjunction with, or after duplication.

On December 13, 2013, in CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Dyk, O'Malley, Taranto*) reversed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded the district court judgment that CBT pay the defendants their costs, which the clerk taxed at $49,824.60 for Return Path and $268,311.12 for Cisco, following the stipulated judgment that the defendants did not infringe U.S. Patents No. 6,192,114 and

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from