We wrote in December about how Judge Williams granted defendant's motion to bifurcate the jury trial in Board of Regents, the University of Texas System v. Boston Scientific Corp., C.A. No. 18-392-GBW (D. Del.).
That trial went forward starting last week, and the trial extended into this week. As we mentioned before, Judge Williams split the trial into two phases:
- Direct infringement and invalidity
- Willful infringement, damages, knowledge, and intent for induced infringement
Near the conclusion of Phase 1, plaintiff moved to "unbifurcat[e]" the trial. According to the transcript:
MR. SHORE [for plaintiff]: Your Honor, we would like for the Court to consider over the weekend, not asking you to rule now, unbifurcating the trial. There's no reason, now that we've gone into the second week, to have to have two deliberations in the span of two days.
I think for the efficiency, for the sake of the jurors, for the sake of the whole process, I think it would be much more efficient, much better to do and just put it all out there at once and just do one phase -- of course, phases.
So, I'd like the Court to at least consider that over the weekend. And if you make a decision, whenever you make a decision earlier, let us know. But I don't see the efficiency in having two jury deliberations maybe in two days.
Defendant opposed, calling the request improper and "utterly baseless":
MR. DROWN [for defendant]: I don't think I need to address that, Your Honor. It's not a motion, it's not a -- it's just not even proper to be asking the Court to do that.
They literally are asking the Court to do that. They need to file a motion. It's utterly baseless, and Your Honor made a ruling. We think the parties need to be starting to stick to Your Honor's ruling. And we respect it, and that's what we're going to do.
. . .
Every single reason Your Honor bifurcated it originally stands, and so that's what we're planning to do and that's what we're going to plan to do next week because that's the Court's order.
I will let the Court know that we have taken Your Honor's desire to streamline things seriously.
The Court asked some questions about defenses that the defendant had dropped, and went into recess for the day. The next trial day, Judge Williams heard some more back-and-forth and denied the motion to unbifurcate:
THE COURT: Good morning. . . . So, first, let's talk about the plaintiffs' request to unbifurcate.
[back-and-forth between the parties]
So it sounds like whether or not -I took it from both sides that if we proceeded in the manner that we have been proceeding, we should be able to get the case to the jury if not before lunch, shortly thereafter. And that if we didn't stick with bifurcation, we would be adding another 70 minutes on the plaintiffs' side, but that's not counting cross, etc.
So given the parties' estimates and whether or not we bifurcate or not, I expect the parties to sort of stick with the times that -- the estimates provided. At this point in the case, the Court's going to stay with its original ruling and we're going to keep the case bifurcated, with the intent to get this case, phase one, to the jury before lunch.
The case ultimately went to the jury on Phase 1 that day. The jury came back with a verdict of infringement and no invalidity early the next day. The parties completed their Phase 2 presentations and the case went back to the jury that same day—and the jury issued a $42 million damages verdict, and found both inducement and willfulness.
I think it's safe to say that the split presentation didn't prejudice plaintiff! I actually heard from one attorney that the bifurcation may actually have helped plaintiff, based on how the evidence came in.
Judge Williams' Court Notches Its First Patent Jury Trial
I understand that this was the first patent jury trial before Judge Williams—and possibly the first jury trial of any kind. It sounds like it was a success!
I actually heard (directly or indirectly) from three attorneys who attended at least part of the trial, and all of them said it was a typical Delaware patent jury trial that proceeded smoothly, with nothing particularly out of the ordinary other than the bifurcation. That's high praise in my view! One attorney went so far as to say that Judge Williams was "great" and "ran a tight ship."
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.
