"The court granted defendants' motion for sanctions against plaintiff for failing to file clear and precise final infringement contentions. ""The Court directed [plaintiff] to file Final Contentions . . . to conform with the . . . Modified Claims Construction Opinion and Order. In addition . . . the Court ordered [plaintiff] to be clear and precise in its Final Contentions so as to permit focused discovery and ensure efficient resolution of this MDL with regard to the cost, time, and effort expended by the parties and the Court. [Plaintiff] has flouted the Court’s direct order. . . . [Plaintiff] is in the business of litigation. . . . While the threat of litigation alone often achieves royalty payments, the threat of never-ending discovery can induce even larger royalty payments. Frankly, this appears to be [plaintiff's] strategy in this case. The Final Contentions are purposefully vague; they were drafted to further [plaintiff's] intention to engage in protracted and expensive litigation. . . . For this astounding and brash failure to follow its orders, the Court will impose a reasonable sanction against [plaintiff] -- [plaintiff] will be required to live with its Final Contentions as they stand without further modification."
In Re: Papst Licensing Digital Camera Patent Litigation - MDL 1880, 1-07-mc-00493 (DCD February 8, 2011, Order) (Collyer, J.)