Plaintiff's Litigation History Negates "Cost of Defense Settlement" Strategy and Eliminates Need to Modify Court's Usual Schedule

The court stated that it would not impose certain changes to its docket and discovery orders despite the fact that plaintiff had sued 95 defendants across 7 cases. "The Court has previously expressed concern about cases where a plaintiff asserts questionable patent claims against a large number of Defendants to extract cost of defense settlements. . . . This however is not one of those cases. Although [plaintiff] asserted the same patent in multiple cases against numerous Defendants and previous cases settled before proceeding to the Markman hearing, [plaintiff] is distinguished by its litigation history. . . . [Its] preparation for the status conference, readiness to provide detailed infringement disclosures, and in camera information regarding the reasonableness of its settlements does not raise the Hobson’s choice concerns that other cases have raised for the Court."

Uniloc USA, Inc. et al v. Engrasp, Inc. et al, 6-10-cv-00591 (TXED May 20, 2011, Order) (Davis, J.)