SERVICES: Trial Presentation Services, Trial Technician, A/V Equipment Rental, and PowerPoint Creation
CASE CAPTION: NexStep, Inc. v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC; 1:19-CV-01031
CASE TYPE: Patent Infringement
COURT: United States District Court for the District of Delaware
JUDGE: Judge Richard G. Andrews
LAW FIRMS: Kramer Levin (NextStep) and WilmerHale (Comcast)
OVERVIEW: Providing trial technician to display exhibits, PowerPoints, and video depositions at trial. Thomas & Thomas was also responsible for some of the A/V equipment and ensuring all the A/V equipment was setup correctly.
UNIQUE ASPECT OF TRIAL: There were two unique aspects to this trial. The first was that the Judge did not allow our team to put on a damages case. Thus, our entire presentation was devoted to infringement and validity. The other unique aspect of the trial was the courtroom was not completely wired like federal courtrooms normally are. Here, we had to bring in a projector and connect it in such a way that both sides could black out the signal when displaying evidence that had not been admitted. This is especially important in patent litigation, as there are voluminous amounts of exhibits and using physical copies to admit evidence would be burdensome and time consuming. Normally, the courtroom is wired in a way that the Court controls what is shown to the jury and is not a responsibility of the parties.
RESULT: Infringement. The jury issued a verdict finding Comcast’s Xfinity brand app indirectly infringed NexStep’s patent for a way of turning a remote control into a customer service “concierge device,” but cleared Comcast of claims of infringing a related patent.