Bodog Casino Loses Federal Appeal

Bodog Casino has recently lost its appeal against a District Court of Nevada ruling which ordered Bodog to pay a $50 million award to 1st Technology LLC.

In June of 2007, 1st Technology accused the Bodog Entertainment Group of infringing on one of their patents, based on the way Bodog distributed their Online Gaming software. Bodog failed to appear at court to contest the claim, which resulted in an automatic judgement of guilty. The judge ordered Bodog to pay $46,597,849 in fines, and their Bodog.com and Bodog.net domain names were confiscated.

To combat this judgement, Bodog Casino rebranded itself as BodogLife, and launched an appeal against the District Court of Nevada to the Court of Appeals at the Federal Circuit in Washington. They argued that they had not been served with a legal notice, and did not have enough of a presence in America to infringe any patents.

However, their appeal was rejected, with the Court of Appeals ordering the Bodog Entertainment Group to pay the original fine and interest on top, with the outstanding amount now well in excess of $50 million.

Scott Lewis, the Chief Executive Officer for 1st Technology, was tickled pink with the ruling: "We cannot be more pleased. Bodog has consistently tried to circumvent the United States justice system and disregarded the legitimacy of our claims against it. We now have the certainty we need to accelerate our seizure of any and all global assets to satisfy the judgment and bring fairness and respect back to Bodog's commercial dealings."


The Chicago-based law firm Flachsbart and Greenspoon were responsible for 1st Technology's successful win in court, with Robert Greenspoon (one of the partners of the group) stating "We are extremely gratified for our client that the Court of Appeals saw the merits exactly the way we did."

This is yet another blow to the beleaguered Bodog Entertainment Group, with Forbes Magazine (July 30th) tying Bodog Casino to Federal authorities which had seized $24 million from bank accounts known to be involved with money laundering. This claim has been disputed by Bodog, and no concrete evidence has been produced showing a connection between Bodog and the seized funds.

• 
• 
• Email to a friend
• Print