Online retailer Newegg Inc. attempted once again to recover attorneys’ fees against a company that it claims lodged a “nuisance” patent suit to extract settlement money, telling a Federal Circuit panel Tuesday that the trial court disregarded the Supreme Court’s new standard for fee awards.

Newegg argued to the three-judge panel that a Texas federal judge paid no attention to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Octane Fitness v. Icon Health & Fitness, which lowered the bar for approval of attorneys’ fees in baseless patent cases, when he denied Newegg’s bid to recover more than $350,000 in attorneys’ and expert fees incurred defending baseless infringement litigation brought by Acacia Research subsidiary AdjustaCam over a camera clip.

…

“That was not only an abuse of discretion, it was a failure to even exercise discretion,” Mark A. Lemley of Durie Tangri LLP said on behalf of Newegg, referring to the panel’s standard of review for the fee denial on appeal.

The opinion of now-retired U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis, the original judge in the case, “was decided under a now-defunct legal rule,” Lemley said.

…

The opinion of now-retired U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis, the original judge in the case, “was decided under a now-defunct legal rule,” Lemley said.

…

“This court has the evidence before it that it can conclude that this case was frivolous. It was litigated in bad faith,” Lemley told the Federal Circuit panel.

…

Newegg is represented by Mark A. Lemley of Durie Tangri LLP; Kent E. Baldauf Jr., Daniel H. Brean and Bryan P. Clark of The Webb Law Firm; and Richard Gregory Frenkel of Latham & Watkins LLP.