Filewrapper-old

Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace ? Failure to Raise Verdict Inconsistency Defeats Appeal
December 14, 2006
In L&W, Inc. v. Shertech, Inc. and Steven W. Sheridan ("Shertech"), the Court affirmed in part the decision of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan holding claim 7 valid and claim 10 invalid of Shertech's '264 patent, and affirming the portion of the judgment holding that the '264 patent was not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. At issue was a patent ("the '265 patent") for an automobile heat shield. L&W sought a declaratory judgment that it did not infringe Shertech's '264 patent, that the '264 patent was invalid, and that the '264 patent was unenforceable because of inequitable conduct. Shertech counterclaimed, alleging that L&W's products infringed the '264 patent. The district court entered summary judgment of infringement. The parties then tried the invalidity claims to a jury. The jury rendered special verdicts, finding all the claims of the '264 patent invalid except claim 7. A bench trial was then held on L&W's inequitable conduct claims. The district court rejected the claim. L&W appealed from the portion of the judgment holding it liable under claim 7 based in part on an asserted inconsistency in the jury's special verdicts. Shertech cross-appealed from the portion of the judgment holding claim 10 invalid. In affirming the district court's decision to regarding claims 7 and 10, the Court held sufficient evidence was presented to the jury to support its verdict regarding claims 7 and 10. However, the Court held that Shertech failed to satisfy its burden of showing that there was no genuine issue of material fact on the issue of infringement. Additionally, the Court held that because neither party objected to the supposed inconsistency in the verdict prior to the jury's dismissal that both parties had waived such a challenge for purposes of appeal. To read the full text of the decision, click here.
Post has no comments.
Post a Comment




Captcha Image
Return to the Filewrapper Blog
  Newer Posts Older Posts  

Purpose

The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.

Disclaimer

McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.