• Oct 9 2019
  • |
  • Category: CAFC Updates

 B.E. Technology filed suit accusing Facebook of infringing certain claims U.S. Patent 6,628,314 relating to methods and apparatus for providing an automatically upgradeable software application that includes targeted advertising.  Approximately a year into the case, Facebook filed multiple petitions for inter partes review of the asserted claims and the district court stayed its proceedings pending the out-come of the Board’s review. The Board instituted review of the ’314 patent and held the asserted claims unpatentable. Facebook then moved in the district court for judgment on the pleadings, seeking a dismissal with prejudice and costs. B.E. agreed that dismissal was appropriate but argued that the claims should be dismissed for mootness, rather than with prejudice. The district court initially agreed with B.E., but when Facebook renewed its motion for costs, the Clerk of Court taxed $4,424.20 in costs against B.E., with the court affirming because although the case was dismissed for mootness, Face-book “obtained the outcome it sought: rebuffing B.E.’s attempt to alter the parties’ legal relationship.” B.E. appeals arguing that, because the case was dismissed as moot based on the Board’s decision, Facebook did not “prevail” in the district court. The CAFC disagrees and affirms the finding that Facebook was the “prevailing party”. Judge Plager concurs in an interestingly short opinion.

View Decision