ON24, Inc. v. webinar.net, Inc.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ON24, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
WEBINAR.NET, INC.,
Defendant.
Case No. 21-cv-07721-EMC
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
SECOND MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’
FEES
Docket Nos. 137-38
Pending before the Court is webinar’s second motion for attorneys’ fees. The Court finds
this matter suitable for resolution without oral argument and thus VACATES the hearing on the
motion. The Court has considered, inter alia, the Federal Circuit’s summary affirmance of this
Court’s decision and the questioning of the panel before it rendered its decision. webinar’s motion
is DENIED. It has failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the instant case is an
exceptional one for purposes of 35 U.S.C. § 285. See EscapeX IP, LLC v. Google LLC, 159 F.4th
1360, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2025) (“A district court may, in an exercise of its discretion, award
attorneys' fees to the prevailing party in an exceptional case. The burden is on the moving party to
prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the case ‘stands out from others,’ ‘considering the
totality of the circumstances,’ including the strength of the parties' litigating positions and their
conduct in the litigation.”).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 14, 2026
______________________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge
Case 3:21-cv-07721-EMC Document 144 Filed 10/14/26 Page 1 of 1