The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the recent Supreme Court decision in Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, Inc., (IP Update, Vol. 5, No. 6) dissolves its jurisdiction over an appeal where jurisdiction was previously predicated on a patent infringement counterclaim. Telecomm Technical Services, Inc. v. Siemens Rolm Communications, Inc., Case No. 00-1579, -1580 (July 2, 2002).
Telcomm appealed from a district court judgment granting Rolm summary judgment on Telcomm’s monopolization and attempted monopolization claims under the Sherman Act and denying class certification on the antitrust claim. Telecomm also challenged Rolm’s standing to bring its patent and copyright infringement counterclaims, which had resulted in a jury verdict of patent and copyright infringement in favor of Rolm. Rolm cross-appealed the district court’s summary judgment denial of its computer copying counterclaim under 17 U.S.C. § 117.
The Federal Circuit acknowledged that its jurisdiction for the case as originally filed was predicated on Rolm’s patent infringement counterclaim. Because of the intervening Supreme Court decision in Holmes, which held that the Federal Circuit cannot assert jurisdiction over a case in which the complaint does not allege a patent claim, the Federal Circuit held that it no longer has appellate jurisdiction and transferred the case to the Eleventh Circuit. As the Federal Circuit explained, jurisdiction cannot be conferred on the Federal Circuit by waiver or acquiescence of the parties, and therefore, because the Holmes decision dissolves its jurisdiction over the appeal, the Court raised the question of jurisdiction sua sponte and transferred the appeal to the regional circuit court.
The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on in that way. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
