FINESSE WIRELESS LLC v. AT&T MOBILITY LLC
Before Moore, Linn, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
Summary: Unclear and internally inconsistent expert testimony was not substantial evidence that supported a jury’s infringement verdict.
Finesse sued AT&T alleging AT&T’s use of Nokia radios infringed two of Finesse’s patents: the ’134 patent and the ’775 patent. Nokia intervened. A jury found all asserted claims in Finesse’s patents were valid and infringed, and awarded damages. AT&T and Nokia moved for judgement as a matter of law (JMOL) of noninfringement, JMOL on damages, and a new trial. The district court denied those motions. AT&T and Nokia appealed.
The Federal Circuit reversed. It held that the jury’s infringement verdict was not supported by substantial evidence. With respect to the ’134 patent, the Federal Circuit found Finesse’s expert testimony was unclear and contradictory as to whether the accused radios’ receiver sampled both “signals of interest” and “interference generating signals.” With respect to the ’775 patent, the Federal Circuit held that no reasonable jury could have found the accused radios perform seven multiplications, as claimed, when a document Finesse’s expert relied on showed only three multiplications. The Federal Circuit reversed the denial of JMOL of noninfringement and vacated the damages award.
Editor: Sean Murray
Subscribe for News and Updates
