Efforts to stay pending reexam and to dismiss and strike fail
Nokia Corporation v. Apple Inc., C. A. No. 09-791-GMS, June 1, 2011.
Sleet, C.J. Plaintiff’s motion to stay defendant’s patent claims pending reexamination before the USPTO is denied; defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s requests for declaratory judgment that it met its FRAND licensing obligations is not barred by the doctrine of judicial estoppel; and denied defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s defense alleging anticompetitive conduct.
Nokia Corporation initiated this patent infringement action against Apple Inc. on October 22, 2009. Nokia’s motion to stay is denied. The court reasoned that the stay pending reexamination would not serve the interests of judicial efficiency because it already held a Markman hearing, fact discovery is nearly complete, a trial date is set, and a stay of only Apple’s claims would not simplify the case because a majority of the case would still proceed. Apple’s motion to dismiss is denied because, inter alia, the court concluded that Nokia sufficiently pled its counterclaim, which seeks injunctive relief based on a contract theory of repudiation of fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory term (“FRAND”) licensing rights. Judicial estoppel based on prior litigation did not apply. Finally, after construing the facts in the light most favorable to Nokia, the court denied Apple’s motion to strike Nokia’s defense which alleges that Apple is estopped from asserting that Nokia engaged in anticompetitive conduct.
