United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Similar documents
Case 1:08-cv ENV -RLM Document 204 Filed 06/15/10 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:06-cv ENV-RLM Document 246 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: <pageid>

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

SCA Hygiene (Aukerman Laches): Court Grants En Banc Review

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

The Edge M&G s Intellectual Property White Paper

Case 1:08-cv ENV -RLM Document 128 Filed 12/10/09 Page 1 of 5. December 10, 2009

THE DISTRICT COURT CASE

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

CASE NOS , -1307, -1309, -1310, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Latham & Watkins Litigation Department

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Fed. Circ. Should Clarify Irreparable Harm In Patent Cases

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Supreme Court of the United States

Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/15/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY *

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H Defendants.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT. ULTRAMERCIAL, LLC and ULTRAMERCIAL, INC., and WILDTANGENT, INC.

Case: Document: 6 Filed: 11/03/2016 Pages: 6 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

HOT TOPICS IN PATENT LAW

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , -1145, -1146, -1147, -1150, -1151, -1152, HAKAN LANS,

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Brian D. Coggio Ron Vogel. Should A Good Faith Belief In Patent Invalidity Negate Induced Infringement? (The Trouble with Commil is DSU)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

This Webcast Will Begin Shortly

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case 1:06-cv SLR Document 12 Filed 09/12/2006 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case 1:15-cv MAK Document 44 Filed 10/10/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 366 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 09/05/2013 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

An Assignment's Effect On Hypothetical Negotiation

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case 1:09-cv REB-CBS Document 35 Filed 06/15/09 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Submitted:September 23, 2013 Decided: December 8, 2014)

Paper Entered: February 6, 2019 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

344 SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. XLIX:343

Supreme Court of the United States

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case 1:14-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 06/06/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

LEXSEE 587 F.3D 127. Docket No cv UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case: Document: 180 Page: 1 07/01/ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, 2012

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before LUCERO, BACHARACH, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.

Case 2:12-cv GP Document 27 Filed 01/17/13 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Induced and Divided Infringement: Updates and Strategic Views

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Supreme Court Upholds Award of Foreign Lost Profits for U.S. Patent Infringement

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Post-EBay: Permanent Injunctions, Future Damages

United States Court of Appeals

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

No LIMELIGHT NETWORKS, INC., AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., In The Supreme Court of the United States

Case 2:05-cv DF-CMC Document 364 Filed 06/26/2007 Page 1 of 9

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit HOCKERSON-HALBERSTADT, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, CONVERSE INC., Defendant-Appellee.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Factors Affecting Success of Stay Motions Pending Inter Partes & Covered Business Method Review

Appeal Nos , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT APPLE INC., MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC,

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D. C. Docket No CV-FTM-29-DNF. versus

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT DEFEENDANT-APPELLEE S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case 3:15-cv BJD-JRK Document 49 Filed 05/12/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID 2283

Transcription:

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit DAVID A. TROPP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONAIR CORPORATION, HP MARKETING CORP. LTD., L.C. INDUSTRIES, LLC, MASTER LOCK COMPANY LLC, SAMSONITE CORPORATION, TITAN LUGGAGE USA, TRAVELPRO INTERNATIONAL INC., TRG ACCESSORIES, LLC, Defendants-Appellees, BRIGGS & RILEY TRAVELWARE LLC, VF OUTDOOR, INC., BROOKSTONE COMPANY, INC., BROOKSTONE STORES, INC., Defendants-Appellees, DELSEY LUGGAGE INC., EBAGS, INC.,

TROPP v. CONAIR CORPORATION 2 MAGELLAN S INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL CORPORATION, TUMI, INC., and WORDLOCK, INC., EAGLE CREEK, A DIVISION OF VF OUTDOOR, INC., OUTPAC DESIGNS INC., Defendants. 2011-1583 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York in Case No. 08-CV-4446, Judge Eric N. Vitaliano. _ Decided: November 15, 2012 _ RONALD D. COLEMAN, Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP, of New York, New York, for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was JOEL G. MACMULL.

3 TROPP v. CONAIR CORPORATION WILLIAM L. PRICKETT, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, for defendants-appellees Conair Corporation, et al. PETER I. BERNSTEIN, Scully, Scott, Murphy & Presser, of Garden City, New York, for defendant-appellee Briggs & Riley Travelware LLC. On the brief was ANTHONY J. DIFILIPPI, Abelman, Frayne & Schwab, of New York, New York. BRIAN A. CARPENTER, Buether Joe & Carpenter LLC, of Dallas, Texas, for defendants-appellees Brookstone Stores, Inc., et al. CHRISTOPHER F. LONEGRO, Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver, of Baltimore, Maryland, for defendant-appellee Delsey Luggage Inc. JANET CULLUM, Cooley Godward Kronish, LLP, of New York, New York for defendant-appellee ebags, Inc. With her on the brief was CAROLYN JUAREZ. Of counsel was LORI R. MASON, of Palo Alto, California. ROBERT J. KENNEY, Birch, Steward, Kolasch & Birch, of Falls Church, Virginia, for defendant-appellee Magellan s International Travel Corporation. NEIL P. SIROTA, Baker Botts, LLP, of New York, New York, for defendant-appellee Tumi, Inc. On the brief was JENNIFER C. TEMPESTA. THOMAS F. FITZPATRICK, Goodwin Procter LLP, of Menlo Park, California, for defendant-appellee Wordlock, Inc.

TROPP v. CONAIR CORPORATION 4 Before RADER, Chief Judge, LOURIE, Circuit Judge, and DANIEL, Chief District Judge 1. RADER, Chief Judge. David A. Tropp sued Defendants-Appellees, eighteen manufacturers and distributors of luggage, for infringement of United States Patent Nos. 7,021,537 (the 537 patent) and 7,036,728 (the 728 patent) in connection with their use of a dual-access luggage lock system designed and licensed by Travel Sentry, Inc. ( Travel Sentry ). In September 2010, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York awarded declaratory judgment of non-infringement of the 537 and 728 patents to Travel Sentry. Travel Sentry, Inc. v. Tropp (Travel Sentry I), 736 F. Supp. 2d 623, 639 (E.D.N.Y. 2010). The district court then dismissed the present case as barred by collateral estoppel based on the decision in Travel Sentry I. Tropp v. Conair Corp., No. 08-cv-4446, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88559 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 10, 2011). Tropp appeals, and this court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1295(a). This court recently vacated and remanded the Travel Sentry I decision for a determination of whether Travel Sentry is liable for indirect infringement under the standard set forth in this court s en banc opinion in Akamai Techs. Co. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 692 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2012). Travel Sentry, Inc. v. Tropp (Travel Sentry II), No. 2011-1023, -1367, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22691, at *25 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 5, 2012). Because Travel Sentry II vacated the decision that formed the basis of the district court s application of collateral estoppel, that doctrine no longer applies. Therefore, this court vacates 1 The Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel, Chief District Judge, United States District Court for the District of Colorado, sitting by designation.

5 TROPP v. CONAIR CORPORATION the dismissal of the present action and remands for further proceedings. VACATED REMED