Judge Denies Microsoft Bid to Overturn $200M Infringement Verdict -- and Tacks On $90M More

Texas federal Judge Leonard Davis on Tuesday rejected Microsoft's request to throw out Toronto-based i4i's recent $200 million win, and added almost $90 million to the May jury verdict: about $40 million for willful infringement of i4i's patent on electronic document processing and about $37 million in post-trial interest. The judge also issued an injunction banning Microsoft from selling products that violate i4i's patent, including some versions of Microsoft Word.

Ross Todd

The American Lawyer

2009-08-13 12:00:00 AM

When Microsoft lost two nine-figure jury verdicts this spring, The Am Law Litigation Daily heard from a fair number of lawyers who doubted the software giant would ever have to pay up. After all, judges and appeals courts have typically looked kindly on Microsoft when juries haven't. But those two verdicts -- a $388 million win for Uniloc in April and a $200 million win for Toronto-based i4i in May -- haven't been knocked out yet, and it's not for lack of trying by Microsoft and its lawyers.

On Tuesday, in a resounding repudiation of Microsoft's arguments, federal district court Judge Leonard Davis of Tyler, Texas, rejected Microsoft's request to throw out i4i's jury win (pdf). And to add insult to injury, he tacked on another $90 million to the jury verdict -- adding about $40 million as punishment for Microsoft's willful infringement of i4i's patent on electronic document processing and about $37 million in post-trial interest. Davis also issued an injunction banning Microsoft from selling products that violate i4i's patent, including some versions of Microsoft Word. The injunction prevents Microsoft from selling Word products that have the capability of opening an XML file containing custom XML. (See Bloomberg's story for more on the ruling.)

Microsoft's lawyers at Weil, Gotshal & Manges didn't return our call for comment on Davis' rulings. In an e-mailed statement, a Microsoft spokesperson said, "We believe the evidence clearly demonstrated that we do not infringe and that the i4i patent is invalid. We will appeal the verdict and the related injunction."

I4i's counsel, Douglas Cawley of McKool Smith, naturally took a different view of the judge's rulings. "We feel confident that Judge Davis has made good decisions in this case and we feel good about the appeal," he told us. Cawley added that the company is planning to bring in another firm to work with McKool on any appeal at the Federal Circuit. (Don't worry: McKool still has plenty to do. As we reported in June, its work for i4i has already brought another client suing Microsoft to the firm.)

Meanwhile, in the Uniloc case, both sides are waiting for Providence federal district court Judge William Smith to rule on post-trial motions. Uniloc outside counsel Dean Bostock of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo told us that Smith heard arguments from both sides in July. Microsoft's counsel at Fish & Richardson did not respond to requests for comment.

Information from The Associated Press contributed to this story.

This article first appeared on The Am Law Litigation Daily blog on AmericanLawyer.com.