Vringo, Inc. : VRINGO ANNOUNCES RULINGS ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS IN I/P ENGINE
VS. AOL, GOOGLE ET AL. [Corrected]
Court Orders Defendants to Respond to I/P Engine's Motion for Ongoing
Royalties by April 18
NEW YORK - April 3, 2013 - Vringo, Inc. (NYSE MKT: VRNG), a company engaged in
the innovation, development and monetization of mobile technologies and
intellectual property, today announced that the Court has ruled on post-trial
motions in its wholly-owned subsidiary I/P Engine, Inc.'s litigation against
AOL, Inc., Google, Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannett Company, Inc., and
Target Corporation (collectively, "Defendants"). This summary is qualified in
its entirety by the Court's rulings.
On November 6, 2012, a jury in U.S. District Court in Norfolk, Virginia ruled
in favor of I/P Engine and against Defendants with respect to Defendants'
infringement of the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,314,420 and
6,775,664. After upholding the validity of the patents-in-suit, and
determining that the asserted claims of the asserted patents were infringed by
Defendants, the jury found that reasonable royalty damages should be based on
a "running royalty," and that the running royalty rate should be 3.5%. The
jury also awarded I/P Engine a total of approximately $30.5 million. On
November 20, 2012,* the clerk entered the Court's final judgment. Thereafter,
the parties filed and briefed post-trial motions.
I/P Engine's Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties
Today, the Court ordered Defendants to respond to I/P Engine's Motion for
Post-Judgment Royalties within fifteen (15) days. I/P Engine will be
permitted to file a reply to Defendants' response within seven (7) days, at
which point, the motion will be ripe for judicial determination.
I/P Engine presented evidence at trial that the appropriate way to determine
the incremental royalty base attributable to Google's infringement was to
calculate 20.9% of Google's U.S. AdWords revenue, then apply a 3.5% running
royalty rate to that base.
I/P Engine has requested that the Court order Defendants to pay ongoing
running royalties for their continuing infringement of I/P Engine's patents
from November 20, 2012,* the date of the entry of final judgment, until either
(i) Defendants cease their infringement or (ii) April 4, 2016, the expiration
date of the patents.
I/P Engine argued that the Court should conclude that an upward adjustment to
a 5% running royalty rate for Defendants' ongoing post-judgment infringement
is appropriate. I/P Engine's damages expert, Dr. Stephen Becker, also reached
the conclusion that there is no reason to depart downward from the 5% royalty
rate because the patents are known to be valid and the patented technology is
acknowledged to be "mission critical" for Google.
Further, I/P Engine argued that Defendants' ongoing infringement is
undisputedly willful because Defendants are fully aware that their use of
AdWords has been adjudged to infringe all of the asserted claims of the valid
and enforceable patents-in-suit. Therefore, I/P Engine requested that the
Court enhance the ongoing royalty rate to 7% in light of Defendants' ongoing
Finally, I/P Engine requested that this Court order that, among other things,
Defendants pay ongoing royalties to I/P Engine on a quarterly basis in
certified funds or by wire transfer, accompanied by a statement certifying,
under penalty of perjury, the U.S. revenue attributable to Defendants' use of
AdWords and the calculation of the royalty amount.
A copy of I/P Engine's motion is available online at http://bit.ly/UPYkFh.
Post-Trial Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law
In orders dated April 2, 2013 and filed today, the Court denied Defendants'
Renewed Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law on (i) Invalidity, (ii)
Non-Infringement and (iii) Damages or New Trial.
The Court also denied I/P Engine's Motion for a New Trial on the Dollar Amount
of Past Damages. On January 31, 2013, the Court denied I/P Engine's Motion
for a New Trial on Laches.
The case is styled I/P Engine, Inc. vs. AOL Inc. et al., and is pending in
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division.
The case number is 2:11cv512RAJ. The court docket for the case is publicly
available on the Public Access to Court Electronic Records website,
www.pacer.gov, which is operated by the Administrative Office of the U.S.
*The clerk entered the Court's final judgment on November 20, 2012. An
earlier draft of this press release stated that the clerk entered the Court's
final judgment on November 20, 2013.
About Vringo, Inc.
Vringo, Inc. is engaged in the innovation, development and monetization of
mobile technologies and intellectual property. Vringo's intellectual property
portfolio consists of over 500 patents and patent applications covering
telecom infrastructure, internet search, and mobile technologies. The patents
and patent applications have been developed internally, and acquired from
third parties. Vringo operates a global platform for the distribution of
mobile social applications and services. For more information, visit:
This press release includes forward-looking statements, which may be
identified by words such as "believes," "expects," "anticipates," "estimates,"
"projects," "intends," "should," "seeks," "future," "continue," or the
negative of such terms, or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking
statements are statements that are not historical facts. Such forward-looking
statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual
results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained
herein. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include,
but are not limited to: our inability to license and monetize our patents,
including the outcome of the litigation against online search firms and other
companies; our inability to monetize and recoup our investment with respect to
patent assets that we acquire; our inability to develop and introduce new
products and/or develop new intellectual property; new legislation,
regulations or court rulings related to enforcing patents, that could harm our
business and operating results; the inability to realize the potential value
created by the merger with Innovate/Protect for our stockholders; unexpected
trends in the mobile phone and telecom infrastructure industries; our
inability to raise additional capital to fund our combined operations and
business plan; our inability to maintain the listing of our securities on a
major securities exchange; the potential lack of market acceptance of our
products; potential competition from other providers and products; our
inability to retain key members of our management team; and other risks and
uncertainties and other factors discussed from time to time in our filings
with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), including our annual
report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 21, 2013. Vringo expressly
disclaims any obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements
contained herein, whether as a result of new information, future events or
otherwise, except as required by law.
Investors and Media:
Executive Vice President
This announcement is distributed by Thomson Reuters on behalf of Thomson
The owner of this announcement warrants that:
(i) the releases contained herein are protected by copyright and other
applicable laws; and
(ii) they are solely responsible for the content, accuracy and originality of
information contained therein.
Source: Vringo, Inc. via Thomson Reuters ONE
Press spacebar to pause and continue. Press esc to stop.