In a patent infringement suit involving claims for an improved spring-loaded parallelogram stilt of the type commonly used in construction, district court's judgment is affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded where: 1) the district court did not clearly err in finding that plaintiff had the requisite knowledge to falsely mark as of a particular date; 2) because the district court's construction of the statute was wrong, an award of $500 in penalties for a single offense of false marketing is vacated and remanded for recalculation of fines under 35 U.S.C. section 292; and 3) the district court's denial of defendant's attorney fees is affirmed.
Appeal from: United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Decided December 28, 2009
Opinion by Moore, Circuit Judge
For Appellant: Richard A. Ejzak, Cohen & Grigsy, PC
For Appellee: Kristin K. Tassin, Dry & Tassin, PLLC