Search Team

Search by Last Name
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z

Xitronix Corp. v. KLA-Tencor Corp.

No En Banc Review of Decision Finding No Appellate Jurisdiction Over Some Walker Process Claims

Xitronix Corp. v. KLA-Tencor Corp., __ F.3d __, (Fed. Cir. June 15, 2018) (Per curiam; Dissent by Newman; Dissent by Lourie w/o opinion) (W.D. Tex.: Sparks) (3 of 5 stars)

Fed Cir denies petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The mandate, based on the panel opinion (882 F.3d 1075), will issue on June 22.

Dissent: Judge Newman disagrees with the panel’s reasoning concerning jurisdiction over Walker Process claims, and would have granted the petition for rehearing en banc. In her view, the panel’s conclusion that the Federal Circuit lacked jurisdiction over a Walker Process antitrust claim alleging fraudulent prosecution of a patent “is contrary to the statute governing the Federal Circuit, and contrary to decades of precedent and experience.” Dissent at 2. “With the panel’s unsupported ruling now places appeals within the exclusive jurisdiction of the regional circuits when the pleading alleges that the patent issue may lead to a non-patent law violation, we should consider this change en banc.” Id.

KEYWORDS: APPELLATE JURISDICTION; WALKER PROCESS