Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., No. 11C 8540, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Jun. 7 & 13, 2012) (Posner, J. sitting by designation).
In light of the interest because of both the high profile parties and the fact that Seventh Circuit Judge Posner is presiding over the case, I am going to go out of order and profile a significant number of opinions from this case during June.
Judge Posner canceled the trial that had been scheduled to begin June 11 holding, tentatively, that neither party had provided sufficient evidence to withstand summary judgment of no damages. The Court also promised a more detailed analysis in a later opinion, which has not issued as of the date of this blog post.
The Court further held that the parties had no rights to injunctive relief. The parties had already made clear they believed money damages were an adequate remedy and injunctive relief “would impose costs disproportionate to the harm to the patentee and the benefit of the alleged infringement to the alleged infringer and would be contrary to the public interest . . . . “
Six days later, however, the Court granted plaintiffs’ (collectively “Apple”) request for an injunctive relief hearing to allow the parties to attempt to satisfy the eBay factors. The parties were given until June 18 to submit briefs and were to be prepared to address “the possibility of substitution for an injunction of an equitable decree for a reasonable royalty going forward.”