March 12, 2007
I will periodically post case citations from the Federal Circuit along with the date of the opinion/order and a brief list of the legal topics discussed therein (specifically those with additional embedded case law citations). My goal is to post new cases on a weekly basis. This posting covers the two orders issued by the Federal Circuit during the 10th calendar week of 2007. All opinions are precedential unless otherwise indicated.
Baychar, Inc., et al. v. Salomon North America, Inc. (order) (03/08/2007): at the district court level, defendant granted summary judgment on non-infringement and exhaustion/implied license regarding U.S. Patent No. 6,048,810; plaintiff filed notice of appeal 35 days after judgment, defendant moved to dismiss appeal as untimely, over two belated extensions of time by plaintiff; motion to dismiss granted
Recommended Decision on Defendant’s Motions for Summary Judgment Asserting Patent Invalidity and Non-Infringement (U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, July 19, 2006): LINK
Order Affirming the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge (November 6, 2006): LINK
Whirlpool Corp., et al. v. LG Electronics, Inc., et al. (order) (03/08/2007): “judgment” entered after grant of summary judgment of noninfringement of one patent and invalidity of the second patent at issue at the district court level, but LG (defendant) and General Electric did not file motions for summary judgment concerning all issues underlying the declaratory judgment counterclaims after the counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity were filed; Whirlpool (plaintiff) argues it can appeal despite the lack of entry of a judgment dismissing or denying the defendant’s counterclaims as the district court’s intent to deny was clear under the circumstances; the Federal Circuit court did not agree with this argument, stating that Whirlpool’s appeal was premature because not all claims for relief were disposed of; defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s appeal granted because the appeal was premature
Baychar, Inc., et al. v. Salomon North America, Inc. (order) (03/08/2007): at the district court level, defendant granted summary judgment on non-infringement and exhaustion/implied license regarding U.S. Patent No. 6,048,810; plaintiff filed notice of appeal 35 days after judgment, defendant moved to dismiss appeal as untimely, over two belated extensions of time by plaintiff; motion to dismiss granted
Recommended Decision on Defendant’s Motions for Summary Judgment Asserting Patent Invalidity and Non-Infringement (U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, July 19, 2006): LINK
Order Affirming the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge (November 6, 2006): LINK
Whirlpool Corp., et al. v. LG Electronics, Inc., et al. (order) (03/08/2007): “judgment” entered after grant of summary judgment of noninfringement of one patent and invalidity of the second patent at issue at the district court level, but LG (defendant) and General Electric did not file motions for summary judgment concerning all issues underlying the declaratory judgment counterclaims after the counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity were filed; Whirlpool (plaintiff) argues it can appeal despite the lack of entry of a judgment dismissing or denying the defendant’s counterclaims as the district court’s intent to deny was clear under the circumstances; the Federal Circuit court did not agree with this argument, stating that Whirlpool’s appeal was premature because not all claims for relief were disposed of; defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s appeal granted because the appeal was premature
0 comments:
Post a Comment