The District Court reasoned that, although the first-filed action is preferred because of the first-to-file rule, equitable considerations favored the later-filed Contec suit. In coming to its decision, the district court relied on the timing and content of the communications between the two parties.
The Federal Circuit reviewed the findings of the of the district court for abuse of discretion. With respect to the greater convenience of the New York forum, the Federal Circuit court noted that Contec witnesses, its record databases, and three of the six inventors of the patents resided in New York, and five of the inventors, considered key witnesses, were beyond the subpoena power of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Considering all relevant factors, the Federal Circuit found that New York was a more convenient forum, on balance. Because all of the factors weighed in favor of New York as the more appropriate forum, the Federal Circuit found that the district court had not abused its discretion.
Tanzymore v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. He focuses his practice in the pharmaceutical, life sciences, biotechnology, and medical device fields. His practice encompasses litigation, including Hatch-Waxman litigation; licensing; counseling; due diligence; and patent and trademark prosecution. He has served as litigation counsel in a variety of patent and trademark disputes in many different jurisdictions, and has also served as appellate counsel before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Joe also focuses on complex inter partes matters before the U. S Patent and Trademark Office, inventorship disputes, reexaminations and reissues. His experience includes numerous interferences, a particular advantage in new U. The petition should set forth that venue is appropriate based upon the parties' dwelling place.
Set forth the facts of the case, including specific information about how the defendant has breached a legal duty. If the petition is alleging that the defendant has violated a statute, identify all parts of the statute and how the defendant violated each section.
Also, if the plaintiff made any effort to demand the defendant cease his activity, the court should be made aware of this fact. Include a prayer for relief at the conclusion of the petition. The prayer for relief is a short section succinctly stating what the plaintiff is seeking. It should state that the plaintiff is seeking declaratory relief and what statutes or laws apply. The answer lies in examining the circumstances under which the first-filed rule is abrogated.
The first-filed rule has been the policy of federal courts for nearly years: "In all cases of concurrent jurisdiction, the court which first has possession of the subject must decide it. However, the rule is discretionary, [5] with the first-filed court almost always the court that decides which of the two cases will proceed. What constitutes an anticipatory filing is a highly fact-dependent inquiry. Serta, Inc. At oral argument, Serta argued that it had to file its declaratory judgment action quickly to protect important business relationships rather than being motived by beating Cassini to the courthouse.
Cassini had sent pre-litigation letters to J. Several months later, we were back in the S. The Lifeguard Store, Inc. In Pepic , we were able to obtain a dismissal of the first-filed case arguing that the first-filer had no connection to the S.
The first-filed rule can be abrogated where the balance of conveniences decidedly tilts to the second-filed action. No thank you. Declaratory Judgment Primary tabs Overview A declaratory judgment is a binding judgment from a court defining the legal relationship between parties and their rights in a matter before the court.
A declaratory judgment is also called a declaration.
0コメント