Free Judgment - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:02-cv-01125-LTB-OES

Document 196

Filed 11/04/2005

Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

DAVID L. HILDEBRAND, Plaintiff, vs. STECK MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., CORNWELL QUALITY TOOLS COMPANY, MAC TOOLS, MATCO TOOLS, SNAP-ON TOOLS COMPANY, TOOLS USA EQUIPMENT COMPANY, Defendants. Case No. 02-cv-01125-ABJ-OES

JUDGMENT

The above-entitled matter came for jury trial before this Court, Honorable Alan B. Johnson, United States District Judge, presiding; Mr. David L. Hildebrand having appeared as the Plaintiff Pro Se; Messrs. David C. Greer and Charles F. Shane having appeared as counsel for Defendants. The trial proceeded to the close of evidence and, at close, the Court instructed the jury. After the charging and upon deliberation, the duly empaneled and sworn jury rendered its unanimous verdict providing, in pertinent part, as follows:

1

Case 1:02-cv-01125-LTB-OES

Document 196

Filed 11/04/2005

Page 2 of 6

1.

Has the Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand, proven by a preponderance of the evidence, that the products manufactured and sold by Defendants infringe on one or more of the claims of the `981 Patent? Yes T No

2.

Has the Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand, proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he is the owner of the `981 Patent? Yes T No

3.

Have the Defendants, Steck Manufacturing Company, Inc., Cornwell Quality Tools Company, Mac Tools, Matco Tools, Snap-On Tools Company, and Tools USA Equipment Company, proven by clear and convincing evidence that the patent is invalid because Mr. Hildebrand did not invent the subject matter sought to be patented? Yes No T

4.

Has the Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand, proven by clear and convincing evidence that Defendants' infringement of the `981 Patent was willful? Yes No T

5.

Have the Defendants proven by clear and convincing evidence that the differences between the subject matter of the patented product in the `981 Patent and the prior art are such that the subject matter of the `981 Patent as a whole would have been "obvious" at the time the invention was made to persons having ordinary skill in the pertinent art? Yes No T

2

Case 1:02-cv-01125-LTB-OES

Document 196

Filed 11/04/2005

Page 3 of 6

6.

Have the Defendants proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that the invention claimed by Mr. Hildebrand was "on sale" in the United States of America more than one year before Mr. Hildebrand filed the patent application on September 20, 1995? Yes No T

7.

Have the Defendants proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that a competitive product to Mr. Hildebrand's `981 Patent was in "public use" in the United States of America more than one year before Mr. Hildebrand filed the patent application on September 20, 1995? Yes No T

8.

Have the Defendants proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that Mr. Hildebrand disclosed or failed to disclose material information with the intent to deceive the patent examiner in the prosecution of the `981 Hildebrand Patent? Yes No T

9.

Has the Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand, proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants' infringement caused damage to him for: a) A Reasonable Royalty: Yes b) Loss of Profits: Yes T No No T

3

Case 1:02-cv-01125-LTB-OES

Document 196

Filed 11/04/2005

Page 4 of 6

10.

What sum, if any, has Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand, proven by a preponderance of the evidence will compensate him for damage caused by the Defendants' infringement of the `981 Patent? a) b) Reasonable Royalty: Lost Profit: Ø $ 74,863

The Court, after further review, finds and concludes that the verdict as presented is fair and consistent with the charged and applicable law. Accordingly, with the issues having been tried and the jury having rendered its unanimous verdict, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that United States Patent Number 5,737,981, entitled "Removal Device for Threaded Connecting Devices," retains its validity as previously determined by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on April 14, 1998, enjoying all the status and protection provided by the United States Constitution and laws, including, but not limited to, protections afforded by and through Title 35 of the United States Code. It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand, recover from the infringing Defendants--Steck Manufacturing Company, Inc., Cornwell Quality Tools Company, Mac Tools, Matco Tools, Snap-On Tools Company, and Tools USA Equipment Company--the total sum of $74,863, plus post-judgment interest thereon 4

Case 1:02-cv-01125-LTB-OES

Document 196

Filed 11/04/2005

Page 5 of 6

at the statutory rate of 3.85%, from the date of entry of this judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961. Said Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the above-stated amount. It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand, recover all reasonable litigation costs of this action from the above-named Defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) and Local Rule 54 of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the parties proceed according to Local Rule 54.1 of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado regarding the taxation of costs. It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Plaintiff, David L. Hildebrand shall, if necessary, and within thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this judgment, submit to the to the Court an application for attorneys' fees pursuant to Local Rule 54.3 of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The Defendants shall, if necessary, file objections to the fee request, supported by affidavits or other evidence, within fifteen (15) days after Plaintiff's filing of the fee claim.

5

Case 1:02-cv-01125-LTB-OES

Document 196

Filed 11/04/2005

Page 6 of 6

Dated this 2nd day of November, 2005.

s/ Alan B. Johnson ALAN B. JOHNSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SITTING BY DESIGNATION

Gregory C. Langham , Clerk By s/ Stephen P. Ehrlich, Chief Deputy Clerk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO

6