Escapex IP LLC v. Google LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ESCAPEX IP LLC, Case No. 22-cv-08711-VC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

v. ATTORNEYS’ FEES UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 285

GOOGLE LLC,

Re: Dkt. No. 41 Defendant.

The motion for attorneys’ fees is granted. This order assumes the reader’s familiarity with the facts of the case, the relevant law, and the arguments made by the parties. Google is the prevailing party because the parties stipulated to the dismissal of EscapeX’s claims with prejudice. United Cannabis Corporation v. Pure Hemp Collective, Inc., 66 F.4th 1362, 1367–68 (Fed. Cir. 2023). And Google has met its burden to show that this is an exceptional case under the meaning of the fee-shifting statute. It is obvious that EscapeX conducted no serious pre-suit investigation and that this case was frivolous from the start. EscapeX’s initial and first amended complaints cobbled together features from two different YouTube products to allege infringement of its purported patent. See Dkt. Nos. 1, 8. When alerted to this fact by Google—a fact that a basic pre-suit investigation would have uncovered—EscapeX amended its complaint…