Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

November 21, 2005, Decided

05-1009, -1487

Opinion

 [***1140]  [*1378]   CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff-appellant IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. ("IPXL") appeals the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of  [***1141]  Virginia granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant-appellee Amazon.com, Inc. ("Amazon"), see IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 333 F. Supp. 2d 513 (E.D. Va. 2004) ("Summary Judgment"), and awarding Amazon attorney fees, see  [**2]   IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 04-CV-70 (E.D. Va. Sept. 24, 2004) ("Attorney Fees"). IPXL sued Amazon, alleging that Amazon's "1-click system" infringed claims 1, 2, 9, 15 and 25 of its U.S. Patent No. 6,149,055 ("the '055 patent"). The district court found that Amazon's system did not infringe the '055 patent and that all relevant claims were invalid. Finding that the case was "exceptional," the district court awarded Amazon attorney fees and costs under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Because we agree that claims 1, 2, 9, 15 and 25 are invalid, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment on invalidity and need not reach its ruling on noninfringement. However, because Amazon did not timely file its motion for attorney fees under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2)(B), we reverse the district court's grant of attorney fees and costs.

The '055 patent, entitled "Electronic Fund Transfer or Transaction System," is directed to a system for executing electronic  [*1379]  financial transactions, such as an electronic fund transfer system, including automated teller machines ("ATMs") or point of sale ("POS") terminals. The [**3]  essence of the '055 patent is that the system stores information previously defined by the user and displays that information to the user in a single screen, from which the user may select a transaction. Thus, the system allows the user to execute a financial transaction in fewer steps.

Representative claim 1 reads as follows:

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

430 F.3d 1377 *; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 25120 **; 77 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1140 ***

IPXL HOLDINGS, L.L.C., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

Prior History:  [**1]  Appealed from: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Judge Leonie M. Brinkema.

IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32621 (E.D. Va., June 28, 2005)IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 333 F. Supp. 2d 513, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19909 (E.D. Va., 2004)

Disposition: AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.

CORE TERMS

district court, patent, display, screen, user, parameters, attorney's fees, argues, stored, input, electronic, selections, summary judgment, anticipated, apparatus, invalid, user-defined, indefinite, discloses, motion for attorney fees, enlargement, predicted, financial transactions, infringement, transactions, costs, funds, award of attorney's fees, invention, execute

Patent Law, Jurisdiction & Review, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Anticipation & Novelty, Fact & Law Issues, Specifications, Definiteness, Infringement Actions, Claim Interpretation, Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Entitlement as Matter of Law, General Overview, Appeals, Summary Judgment Review, Standards of Review, Damages, Collateral Assessments, Attorney Fees, Defenses, Patent Invalidity, Presumption of Validity, Costs & Attorney Fees, Attorney Fees & Expenses