Summary judgement of noninfringement vacated because settlement agreement mooted the case

Serta Simmons Bedding v. Casper Sleep was decided on February 13, 2020 on appeal from the Southern District of New York. In September 2017, plaintiff Serta filed a patent infringement lawsuit against defendant Casper. While Casper’s motions for summary judgment of non-infringement were pending, the parties executed a settlement agreement. …

Federal Circuit on Section 286 and the statute of limitations for patent infringement damages

Section 286 of the Patent Act “sets forth a limitation on damages.” Adams & Associates v. Dell. Under 35 U.S.C. § 286, “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by law, no recovery shall be had for any infringement committed more than six years prior to the filing of the complaint or counterclaim for …

Declaratory jurisdiction existed where patentee sued the declaratory plaintiff’s customer

UCP v. Balsam is a nonprecedential case decided on September 19, 2019 and unsealed on October 7, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Balsam sued Frontgate (a third party) alleging infringement of certain patents. After the claim construction order, the parties settled, whereby Frontgate agreed to stop purchasing the relevant product …

Consumer’s interest in purchasing hypothetical infringing products does not create declaratory jurisdiction

AIDS Healthcare v. Gilead was decided on May 11, 2018 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Declaratory defendant Gilead has patents or is a licensee of patents on a particular antiviral agent used to treat AIDS. Declaratory plaintiff Healthcare provides medical care to persons afflicted with AIDS. Healthcare filed a declaratory judgment …

No declaratory jurisdiction where invalidity issue would not resolve the underlying contractual dispute

AbbVie v. MedImmune was decided on February 5, 2018 on appeal from the Eastern District of Virginia. A 1995 agreement between the parties licensed AbbVie to practice the ‘516 patent, among others. AbbVie did not practice the patent at the time. Under the agreement, AbbVie was to pay royalties on the sales …

Court retained declaratory jurisdiction despite that DJ-defendant sold its IP assets prior to the DJ action

Industrial Models v. SNF is a nonprecedential case decided on November 7, 2017 on appeal from the Northern District of Texas. This suit relates to Industrial Models’ decision to enter the market for fiberglass utility bodies for use in trucks. In February 2013, plaintiff SNF sent defendant Industrial Models a cease-and-desist letter indicating that …

Declaratory action improper where DJ-defendant’s patent ownership was contingent on prevailing in state court

First Data v. Inselberg was decided on September 15, 2017 on appeal from the District of New Jersey. Inselberg is the inventor of various relevant patents formerly held by Inselberg Interactive. In 2011, Inselberg Interactive transferred “all right, title, and interest” in the patent portfolio to Bisignano, who eventually became CEO …

Declaratory action by U.S. manufacturer improper where notice letters targeted foreign distributors for infringing a foreign patent

Allied Mineral v. Osmi was decided on September 13, 2017 on appeal from the Southern District of Florida. In June 2015, Stellar sent notice letters to two Mexican companies, accusing them of infringing Stellar’s Mexican patent. The Mexican companies were distributors of Allied, an American company. Allied manufactures the products accused of infringement in …

Declaratory action OK despite that DJ-plaintiff didn’t sell or manufacture the product

Asia Vital v. Asetek was decided on September 8, 2016 on appeal from the Eastern District of Virginia. There, the district court dismissed Asia Vital’s declaratory judgment action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. After bringing suits against other competitors, Asetek sent Asia Vital a letter, accusing it of manufacturing an infringing …

Letter offering a nonexclusive license provided actual notice of infringement despite not threatening a lawsuit

SRI International v. Advanced Technology Laboratories was decided on October 23, 1997 on appeal from the Northern District of California. The case involved many issues but this post will only focus on actual notice under § 287(a). In May 1986, plaintiff SRI sent a letter to defendant Advanced Technology Laboratories (ATL) offering a non-exclusive license. …