3 ms·
Not quite the reverse. As another commenter noted, a large part of the problem is that that particular east Texas district didn't force plaintiff to pay defend
by colanderman 9y ago
Not quite the reverse. As another commenter noted, a large part of the problem is that that particular east Texas district didn't force plaintiff to pay defendants' costs when they (the plaintiff) lost. When you let the defendant choose the (presumably friendly) court, the cost of failed litigation shifts from the defendant to the plaintiff, who, unlike the defendant, has the option to appeal failed litigation. (But IANAL and I'm sure there are exceptions to this.)
- MichaelBurge 9y agoDo you mean plaintiff instead of prosecutor?
- colanderman 9y agoYes, fixed, thanks.
- xenadu02 9y agoAnd indeed SCOTUS has smacked both the CAFC and the Eastern District over patent fees in the past 10 years. More than once.