Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l, Inc.

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

March 26, 2013, Decided

2011-1218, 2011-1238

Opinion

 [***1364]  [*1354]   Reyna, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a final judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware finding that Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation (collectively, "Fairchild") willfully infringed several valid patents belonging to Power Integrations, Inc. ("Power Integrations"). After two jury trials, a bench trial, and post-trial proceedings including  [**2] a motion for remittitur, the district court entered final judgment in favor of Power Integrations and awarded compensatory and enhanced damages in the amount of $12,866,647.16. Fairchild on appeal asserts that the district court erred in its claim construction, in denying Fairchild's motion for judgment as a matter of law that one of Power Integrations' claimed inventions would have been obvious, in formulating its remitted damages award, and in finding Fairchild's infringement willful. On cross-appeal, Power Integrations argues that it was error for the district court to grant Fairchild's motion for remittitur, thereby reducing the jury's original damages award by eighty-two percent. Power Integrations asserts further error in the district court's exclusion of evidence related to price erosion prior to the date Fairchild was notified of its infringement, and in the district court's denial of Power Integrations' motion for a post-verdict accounting.

For the reasons set out below, we affirm the district court's finding of non-obviousness; we affirm-in-part and reverse-in-part on claim construction; we vacate the district court's order of remittitur and its attendant damages award; we  [**3] find error in the district court's exclusion of evidence related to pre-notice price erosion and in its refusal to grant Power Integrations a post-verdict accounting; we vacate the district court's finding of willful infringement; and we remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Procedural Posture

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.

711 F.3d 1348 *; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5949 **; 106 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1361 ***; 2013 WL 1200270

POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC., Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, v. FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, Defendants-Appellants.

Prior History:  [**1] Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in case No. 04-CV-1371, Judge Leonard P. Stark.

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l, Inc., 585 F. Supp. 2d 562, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90821 (D. Del., Nov. 7, 2008)Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100533 (D. Del., Dec. 12, 2008)Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l, Inc., 589 F. Supp. 2d 505, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100536 (D. Del., Dec. 12, 2008)

Disposition: AFFIRMED-IN-PART, REVERSED-IN-PART, VACATED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED.

CORE TERMS

infringement, signal, frequency, Integrations, district court, damages, patented, sales, variation, oscillating, drive, argues, worldwide, invention, award damages, soft, mobile phone, power supply, chargers, remittitur, accounting, counter, specification, patentee, skilled, limitations, magnitude, voltage, circuits, erosion

Patent Law, Jurisdiction & Review, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Infringement Actions, Claim Interpretation, General Overview, Means Plus Function Clauses, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Trials, Judgment as Matter of Law, Substantial Evidence, Nonobviousness, Elements & Tests, Graham Test, Secondary Considerations, Abuse of Discretion, Evidence, Admissibility, Expert Witnesses, Substantial Evidence, Remedies, Damages, Relief From Judgments, Additur & Remittitur, Remittiturs, Increased Damages, Aids & Extrinsic Evidence, Hindsight, Infringing Acts, Expert Witnesses, Daubert Standard, Fact & Law Issues, Defenses, Marking, Measure of Damages, Judgments, Motions for New Trials