The Federal Circuit held last Friday that the “re-examination” clause of the seventh amendment forbids a court from changing a jury’s damages award without giving the claimant the option of retrying the amount of damages. Minks v. Polaris Industries, Inc., No. 07-1490 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 17, 2008).
The jury in Minks found that Polaris Industries wilfully infringed a patent relating to an electronic governor system for internal combustion engines. The jury awarded “reasonable royalty” damages of $1,294,620.91. The district court cut the award to its own estimate of a reasonable royalty — a mere $27,904.80 — but failed to offer Minks a new trial on damages as an alternative to accepting the court’s de novo damages determination.
The Federal Circuit relied on the seventh amendment’s injunction that “no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than accordng to the rules of common law.” U.S. Const. amend. VII. A court runs afoul of this re-examination clause, the panel held, when it substitutes, for a jury’s award, the court’s own factual assessment of what amount the evidence supports. The district court did just that, and so it must on remand give Minks the choice of a new trial on damages.
Blawgletter hazards a guess that Minks will go the new trial route.
