In granting plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285, the court rejected defendant's argument that "the purpose for an award of attorney fees has already been accomplished through the sanctions and enhanced damages ordered by this Court. . . . While [defendant] argues that it 'has already paid a very heavy price for the accused conduct and there is no reason to further punish [it] by awarding attorneys’ fees,' the Court would like to emphasize that an award of attorney fees is awarded as compensation to a prevailing party when the Court finds the case to be exceptional, and not because the Court seeks to punish the other party."
Furminator, Inc. v. Kim Laube & Co., 4-08-cv-00367 (MOED May 23, 2011, Order) (Webber, J.)