In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 12-484C (Filed Under Seal: March 31, 2021) (Reissued April 7, 2021) ) FASTSHIP, LLC, ) Patent case; prevailing plaintiff’s claim ) for attorneys’ fees and expenses; 28 Plaintiff, ) U.S.C. § 1498(a); lack of substantial ) justification for government’s position; v. ) attorneys’ fees and expenses ) UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Mark L. Hogge, Dentons US LLP, Washington, D.C. for the plaintiff. With him on briefs were Rajesh C. Noronha, Dentons US LLP, Washington, D.C. and Donald E. Stout, Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP, Washington, D.C. Scott Bolden, Deputy Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C for the United States. With him on briefs were Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, Gary L. Hausken, Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C, and Andrew P. Zager, Department of the Navy, Washington, D.C. OPINION AND ORDER 1 LETTOW, Senior Judge. Pending before the court in this patent case is FastShip, LLC’s motion for attorneys’ fees and bill of costs. 2 The court previously found that in constructing a class of littoral combat ships 1 Because of the protective order entered in this case, this opinion was initially filed under seal. The parties were requested to review this opinion and to submit proposed redactions of any confidential or trade secret material. No redactions were requested. 2 This case has been extensively litigated, resulting thus far in six published opinions and orders. See FastShip, LLC v. United States, 114 Fed. Cl. 499 (2013) (“FastShip I”) (claims construction); FastShip LLC v. United States, 122 Fed. Cl. 71 (2015) (“FastShip II”); FastShip, LLC v. United States, 131 Fed. Cl. 592 (2017) (“FastShip III”) (ruling on liability and just compensation for infringement), aff’d, FastShip, LLC v. United States, 892 F.3d 1298 (Fed Cir. 2018) (“FastShip IV”); FastShip, LLC v. United States, 143 Fed. Cl. 700 (2019) (“FastShip V”) (“LCS”), the Navy infringed two patents held by FastShip. See FastShip III, 131 Fed. Cl. at 627- 28 (awarding FastShip $6,449,585.82 plus interest for the United States’ infringement); FastShip IV, 892 F.3d at 1310 (correcting a transcription error, resulting in an award of $7,117,271.82). Ultimately, FastShip recovered $12.36 million, including interest. See FastShip V, 143 Fed. Cl. at 709. In 2018, plaintiff initially moved for attorneys’ fees and related expenses. See Pl’s Mot. for Atty’s Fees & Related Expenses, ECF No. 190. The court granted plaintiff’s motion in part and awarded FastShip $7,407,967.36 for attorney’s fees and related expenses. Id. at 735. The government appealed the court’s ruling, and the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded. FastShip VI, 968 F.3d at 1336. FastShip now renews its motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. The court finds that the government’s litigating positions were not substantially justified. Therefore, FastShip’s motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and the court awards FastShip fees and costs totaling $7,786,601.46. BACKGROUND A. Factual Background & Merits Litigation …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals