§Why CasetextPricing

ArcticDx, Inc. et al v. Sequenom, Inc. et al

REPLY to Response to Motion re MOTION to Dismiss Sequenom Defendants' Reply Brief In Support Of Motion To Dismiss Declaratory Judgment Claims II Through XI

12 Cited authorities

  1. Medimmune, Inc. v. GenenTech, Inc.

    549 U.S. 118 (2007)   Cited 2,622 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"

  2. Sandisk v. Stmicroelectronics

    480 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007)   Cited 314 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "where a patentee asserts rights under a patent based on certain identified ongoing or planned activity of another party, and where that party contends that it has the right to engage in the accused activity without license, an Article III case or controversy will arise"

  3. Prasco, LLC v. Medicis Pharmaceutical Corp.

    537 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2008)   Cited 300 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that one prior lawsuit concerning different products, without more, was not sufficient to sustain an actual controversy

  4. Benitec Aus. v. Nucleonics

    495 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2007)   Cited 238 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the possibility of future activity that would be subject to a patent infringement claim was too uncertain to create a justiciable controversy

  5. Micron v. Mosaid

    518 F.3d 897 (Fed. Cir. 2008)   Cited 202 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under Medlmmune, declaratory judgment jurisdiction existed based on a cease and desist letter plus defendant's suits against other manufacturers

  6. Super Sack Manufacturing Corp. v. Chase Packaging Corp.

    57 F.3d 1054 (Fed. Cir. 1995)   Cited 219 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a patent holder's renunciation of all infringement claims arising from the products currently manufactured by a competitor mooted the competitor's request for a declaratory judgment of patent invalidity

  7. Cat Tech LLC v. Tubemaster, Inc.

    528 F.3d 871 (Fed. Cir. 2008)   Cited 148 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that even after the Supreme Court's decision in MedImmune, "the issue of whether there has been meaningful preparation to conduct potentially infringing activity remains an important element in the totality of circumstances which must be considered in determining whether a declaratory judgment is appropriate"

  8. Hewlett-Packard v. Acceleron

    587 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 114 times
    Holding that actual controversy as to infringement existed where patent owner sent plaintiff two letters seeking "to discuss" the patent

  9. Amana Refrigeration, Inc. v. Quadlux, Inc.

    172 F.3d 852 (Fed. Cir. 1999)   Cited 154 times
    Holding that fear over suit over "new products 'in the pipeline,' but not advertised, manufactured, marketed, or sold before the filing date" failed to demonstrate the continued existence of an actual case or controversy

  10. Dow Jones & Co. v. Ablaise Ltd.

    606 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2010)   Cited 87 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the covenant not to sue proffered by Ablaise, which did not included Dow Jones' parent corporation News Corporation, which is a legally distinct entity, was sufficient to extinguish the controversy between Ablaise and Dow Jones and divest the district court of its Article III jurisdiction

  11. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 23,013 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system