Jury verdict is adjusted after post-trial motions; new trial is denied
SRI International, Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 04-1199-SLR, August 20, 2009.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for post-trial relief is denied. ISS’s motion for JMOL is granted in part and denied in part. Symantec’s motion for JMOL with respect to non-infringement by SGS and Manager Products is granted. Symantec’s motion for a new trial or to amend judgment is denied.
The patents-in-suit relate to monitoring and surveillance of computer networks for intrusion detection. This Court’s prior determination of invalidity as to certain patents was remanded. A jury trial began September 2, 2008. The jury found defendants infringed two patents, and that ISS did not infringe a third patent, and that all three patents are valid. The plaintiff presented no substantial evidence that the combination of SGS and Manager Products infringed and the Court granted Symantec’s motion for JMOL. Symantec did not challenge jury’s finding that its ManHunt products infringe, and the judgment for plaintiff is affirmed. The Court finds the jury’s verdict of noninfringement by ISS of the ‘338 patent is supported by substantial evidence. However, as to another patent, because there is a non-infringing use of the accused product, plaintiff was required to demonstrate that a customer installed the feature and operated it in an infringing manner. Since no substantial evidence supported this claim of infringement, ISS’s motion for JMOL is granted. Substantial evidence supports the jury’s findings that defendants failed to demonstrate anticipation by clear and convincing evidence.
