Cobaltchat.com

The Inter Partes review has found that the claims are valid, and so it now proceeds back to the trial court to figure out what the claims mean and whether Sea Ray infringes on them...

http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/2016/10/r ... brunswick/

John

Sea Ray is even advertising it in there New wakeboard boat.
http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/2016/12/s ... fing-boat/

The case will go as usual.
Both parties will settle out of court for a very small compensation number for Cobalt. Possibly nothing at all...
Cobalt didn't invent the wheel here, or the nut and bolt. They merely made another moving part that can be interpreted a number of different ways.
I expect all boat makers to offer a variation in the near future.

Except now that Sea Ray knows that Cobalt's patent stood up to re-examination, they have essentially lost that argument in court. Now they have to show they don't infringe, which is a different story. Cobalt's claims are pretty narrow, so Sea Ray could simply come up with a different locking mechanism and be OK, but they may still owe royalties on the swim steps they've produced so far.

Sounds like we've got a few attorneys here...

I plead the Fif... damn, caught me again.

Hahaha!

FWIW, Brunswick appealed the judgment, which was upheld in a Federal Circuit Court. The jury awarded Cobalt $2.7M this summer, which is trebled because it was found to be willful. For more info, see:

https://plus.ibinews.com/article/n9sCEE ... ts_upheld/

jhnmdahl wrote: ↑Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:07 pm FWIW, Brunswick appealed the judgment, which was upheld in a Federal Circuit Court. The jury awarded Cobalt $2.7M this summer, which is trebled because it was found to be willful. For more info, see:

https://plus.ibinews.com/article/n9sCEE ... ts_upheld/

.
The thing that is most disturbing is how blatant the copy was. In fact a judgment of this nature which allows for a TRIPLE award are ONLY reserved for the most egregious violators. Basically Brunswick (or Sea Ray if you will for their step "invention") flat out copied Cobalt with no intention or even attempt to change or give credit to the inventor.
....and this from an American company under American law egregiously violating another's patent. I mean patent lawsuits happen all the time--but to be so blatant in your attempt to steal someone's or another company's invention...I really think Brunswick thought they could get away with it and with ease. (what's 2.7 million dollars to a billion dollar corporation) Shame on big Brunswick -- innovation & leadership -- whatev. Go back to billiards.

....and I'm pullin' my Merc back out and putting in a Volvo.


.

Yep, trebled damages in patent suits are reserved for "willful" infringement, where the infringer had (or should have had) knowledge they were infringing. Although the standards keep changing for proving willful infringement and are somewhat complex, if you know about a patent but don't take certain steps to analyze it and ensure you have a reasonable good faith belief you aren't infringing, your infringement can be determined to be willful.

John

jhnmdahl wrote: ↑Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:11 pm A year later, the district court lawsuit has been stayed pending inter partes review of the patent at the USPTO. Those truly interested or truly bored can read all about it at https://ptabtrials.uspto.gov by entering patent number 8375880.

Personally, I think it's 50/50 that Coblat emerges from this IPR with their patent intact, and unlikely that Searay is found to infringe even if the patent remains intact, but we shall see...

Great to see progress made and temporary success for Cobalt in the form on treble damages, John.

U.S. District Judge Henry C. Morgan Jr. granted a series of post-trial requests by Cobalt, the smaller of the two boatmakers, including tacking on enhanced damages that boosted the compensatory damages to $5.4 million from $2.7 million, after adding on some previously uncounted royalty amounts, and concluding that

.
5.4 million!
.
Again, a drop in the bucket for Brunswick, but more importantly —shame on you big Bruns .

The judge also took a stern stance on what he called “bad behavior” by Brunswick in the case, finding that a false statement in the company’s answer to Cobalt’s complaint — that it was unaware of Cobalt’s patent — along with the company’s lie about being in touch with a former employee and its decision to call what Judge Morgan said were deceptive witnesses weighed in favor of awarding enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees, according to the decision.

.

https://www.law360.com/articles/980459/ ... in-ip-suit

.

Yeah, don't lie in litigation, especially if there's a record contradicting your lie. Judges don't like that.

This isn't the first time Brunswick lost a a lawsuit I remember with my first boat that had a Mercruiser in it there was a class action lawsuit for Brunswick cornering the market and pretty much telling boat manufacturers that they have to use only MerCruiser in them. Of course the actual owners of the boats compensation was nothing either a bowling ball a few life jackets or I believe $150 rebate on the purchase of a new MerCruiser drive or engine

tarachanowicz wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:36 pm This isn't the first time Brunswick lost a a lawsuit I remember with my first boat that had a Mercruiser in it there was a class action lawsuit for Brunswick cornering the market and pretty much telling boat manufacturers that they have to use only MerCruiser in them. Of course the actual owners of the boats compensation was nothing either a bowling ball a few life jackets or I believe $150 rebate on the purchase of a new MerCruiser drive or engine

Sounds about right.