A panel of Federal Circuit judges determined that the “confusing and unclear” testimony of an infringement expert cannot support a Texas jury’s $166.3 million patent infringement verdict against Nokia of America and AT&T Mobility.
In a trial before U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap that concluded Jan. 13, 2023, a jury determined Finesse Wireless was entitled to the lump sum damages from AT&T and Nokia for infringing two patents related to intermodulation interference, a longstanding problem for wireless networks.
The Federal Circuit explained the technology in a footnote: “Radios avoid signal interference by operating on different frequencies, but their transmit signals can combine when encountering obstacles (e.g., metal fences, loose cable connections, rusted connectors) to form new frequencies called ‘intermodulation products.’”
Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore authored the court’s 15-page opinion that was issued Wednesday. She wrote that Jonathan Wells, who was Finesse’s infringement expert at trial, “offered no clear or detailed explanation for his contradictory testimony.”
“This sort of confusing change of course is not sufficient to support the jury verdict,” the opinion reads. “When the party with the burden of proof, such as Finesse, rests its case on an expert’s self-contradictory testimony, we may conclude the evidence is insufficient to satisfy that standard.”
The trial began Jan. 9 and deliberations lasted for three hours. Jurors heard from eight witnesses over five days of testimony. Joseph Grinstein, who was on Susman Godfrey’s trial team representing Finesse, told The Lawbook after the verdict that the testimony of inventor Francis Smith was “critical” in reaching the favorable result, because he walked jurors through the inventions “and the problems it was intended to tackle.”
Smith’s patents, which he assigned to his company, Finesse, were for the first effective technique for canceling passive intermodulation products.
Finesse sued AT&T in 2021, and Nokia later intervened in the suit. The jury was told that AT&T infringed Smith’s patents by using certain Nokia radio equipment in its cell towers.
After the district court jury rendered its verdict, Judge Gilstrap denied AT&T’s and Nokia’s motion for judgment as a matter of law. The companies then filed notice of appeal in September 2023.
Oral arguments before the Federal Circuit took place July 10.
Nokia issued a statement to The Lawbook that the appellate panel “has come to the right conclusion.”
“Nokia agrees with the conclusion of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit,” the statement reads. “Nokia respects the intellectual property rights of others, and we did not believe that the Finesse patents-in-suit were infringed by the PIMC feature in Nokia’s accused products.”
AT&T deferred to Nokia for comment, and none of the lead lawyers for the parties responded to requests for comment.
Circuit Judges Richard Linn and Tiffany P. Cunningham also sat on the panel.
Finesse is represented by Paul D. Clement, C. Harker Rhodes IV and Kevin Wynosky of Clement & Murphy and Joseph Grinstein, Meng Xi, Shawn Blackburn and Meg Griffith of Susman Godfrey.
AT&T is represented by Douglas M. Kubehl, Susan Kennedy and Michael Hawes of Baker Botts.
Nokia is represented by Jeffrey Lamken, Jennifer Fischell, Kayvon Ghayoumi and Rayiner Hashem of MoloLamken.
The case number is 24-1039.