P acquired the '269 patent that claims a particular center plate in combination with several other components to form a railroad car underframe structure. D was in the business of manufacturing center plates for sale to rail car builders. D was aware of the '269 patent as early as 1976. D tried to design around the center plate component and that failed. D tried to get a license but was denied. D decided to copy the Low Profile center plate despite counsel's advice that in doing so, D would likely infringe the '269 patent. P sued D alleging that d's infringement was willful. D asserted that the patent was invalid. The jury returned special verdicts that D infringed the '269 patent, that the infringement was willful, and that the patent was not invalid. D was liable for damages in the amount of $1,497,232. This was to compensate for P's lost profits from January 10, 1986, the date that P allegedly notified D of its infringement pursuant to §287(a). D moved for JMOL or a new trial. P moved for enhanced damages, attorney fees, and for JMOL that its damages were not limited under section 287(a). The court declined to set aside the jury's verdict of willful infringement, granted P's motion for enhanced damages and attorney fees, ruled that P's damage recovery was limited under section 287(a), and held that the jury properly determined the date on which P notified D of its infringement pursuant to that provision. Both parties appealed.