"The underlying dispute is a Texas-law breach-of-contract case. T-Mobile and KAIFI settled patent infringement litigation on the eve of trial in the Eastern District of Texas."
"T-Mobile refused to make the contingent payment, contending that KAIFI's positions before the examiner had narrowed the claims through prosecution disclaimer and that KAIFI's failure to disclose contradictory district-court filings rendered the patent unenforceable through inequitable conduct."
"KAIFI then moved to transfer back, arguing that the contract claim does not arise under the patent laws. The motions panel deferred the question to the merits panel."
"T-Mobile's reply brief calls this a 'jurisdiction-if-we-win-but-not-if-we-lose' argument. The oral arguments got into the 'trying to have it both ways' argument."
The Federal Circuit heard arguments regarding its jurisdiction in T-Mobile US, Inc. v. KAIFI LLC, a breach-of-contract case stemming from a patent settlement. T-Mobile contested a contingent payment to KAIFI, citing prosecution disclaimer and inequitable conduct. The case faced jurisdictional confusion due to clerical errors, initially landing in the Fifth Circuit before being transferred. KAIFI's shifting stance on jurisdiction, depending on contract interpretation, raised concerns about the legitimacy of its claims. The merits panel is tasked with resolving these jurisdictional issues.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]