[June 23, 2006] Plaintiff seeks $1.6B in DirecTV patent trial Tweet (Beaumont Enterprise, The (Texas) (KRT) Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) Jun. 23--BEAUMONT -- During closing arguments Thursday in a patent infringement trial in federal court, the plaintiff's lawyer asked the jury to award more than $1.6 billion in damages. Finisar Corp., a Delaware firm based in California, is suing a group of DirecTV corporations and limited liability corporations also based in California, claiming DirecTV used a patented satellite broadcasting system without a licensing arrangement. Finisar claims the $1.65 billion in damages represents 3 percent of the gross sales revenues received by DirecTV and is a "fair and appropriate" award, Larry Laycock, lead plaintiff's council of the Salt Lake City firm Workman & Nydegger, told the jury. Defendant's lawyer Victor Savikas of the Los Angeles firm Jones Day said even if infringement had occurred, appropriate damages would not exceed $17 million. The trial started June 12 in U.S. District Court Ron Clark's courtroom. Laycock said Finisar has ties to this region and a manufacturing operation in Texas, while DirecTV has a significant number of customers in the state. Beaumont lawyer Larry Germer is local lead council for Finisar and DirecTV is represented locally by Thad Heartfield. Laycock said in his closing argument the evidence was "clear and unmistakable" that DirecTV infringed. In 1997 Finisar marketed its system to DirecTV, to its apparent indifference. Laycock said in 2003, after suspicions emerged, an expert investigated DirecTV's system and determined it was the same as Finisar's patent 505. "They knew about the patent and they continued to use it," Laycock said. After Finisar contacted DirecTV and tried to resolve the infringement without resorting to the courts, the broadcasting company stalled on taking any action, Laycock said. Plaintiff's experts testified the system DirecTV uses matches every element of Finisar's patent 505, Laycock said. Savikas countered the lawsuit was motivated by greed, characterizing the lawsuit as a blatant attempt to capitalize on DirecTV's success. Evidence of this, he said, was that Finisar waited until DirecTV had 10 million subscribers before attempting to sue the company. Savikas noted DirecTV was licensed to broadcast for 11 years before Finisar patented its system. An expert hired by DirecTV to investigate Finisar's claims found no infringement occurred. The patent in question, he said, was developed with publishing materials on the Internet in mind; not television broadcasting. Laycock countered that it was clear from looking at the patent that broadcasting was one of the system's intended applications. Laycock noted that video programming was listed on the front page of the patent as one of its applications. The jury deliberated for about two hours Thursday and resumes today at 9 a.m. [email protected] (409) 880-0730 [ Back To TMCnet.com's Homepage ]