OPTi Inc. v. Silicon Integrated Systems Corp. et al, No. 2:10-cv-00279 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 24, 2014)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Opti has, by means of its Rule 59(e) Motion to Amend the Court’s September 9, 2013 Judgment (Dkt. No. 311), raised the issue of ongoing royalties. A procedure for negotiating ongoing royalties has been approved for patent cases in which the future royalties have not been adjudicated at trial. See Paice v. Toyota Motor Corp., 504 F.3d 1293, 1313-16 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also Telecordia Techs., Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 612 F.3d 1365, 1378-79 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Without addressing the merits of Opti’s Rule 59(e) Motion to Amend (Dkt. No.