Civix--Ddi, LLC v. hotels.com Gp., LLC

Federal Circuit

Civix--Ddi, LLC v. hotels.com Gp., LLC

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DecidedMay 1, 2012

Docket2011-1599

StatusUnpublished

This text of Civix--Ddi, LLC v. hotels.com Gp., LLC (Civix--Ddi, LLC v. hotels.com Gp., LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Civix--Ddi, LLC v. hotels.com Gp., LLC, (Fed. Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

NOTE: This order is n0nprecedentia1. United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit CIVIX-DDI, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. HOTELS.COM GP, LLC AND HOTELS.COM, L.P., Defen,dants-Appellees. 4 2011-1599 Appea1 from the United States District C0urt for the N0rthern District of I11inois in case n0. 05-CV-6869, Judge Amy J. St. Eve. ON MOTION - Bef0re RADER, Chief Judge, LINN and PROST, C11rcuit Ju.dges. RADER, Chief Judge. 0 R D E R H0te1s.c0m GP, LLC et a1. move to dismiss Civix-DDI, LLC’s appeal for lack of jmisdicti011. CiVix 0pp0se. H0te1s.c0m replies

CIVlX-DDl V. I-IOTELS.COM 2 Civix’s appeal arises out of a suit it brought in the United States District Court for the Northern District of lllinois charging Hotels.com with infringement of 53 claims of ibm patents. Hotels.com asserted four counterclaims, including declaratory judgment of non-infringement invalidity of the patents asserted, unenforceability of the patents asserted, and breach of contract. On Aug'ust 19, 2011, the district court granted summary judgment of non-infringement on the patent claims asserted. Despite not addressing Hotels.com’s counterclaims the district court ordered the clerk of the court to enter judgment on behalf of the defendant and terminate the case. On September 15, 2011, Civix filed its notice of appeal. Civi_x does not dispute that the district court’s order did not rule on the pending counterclaims, and that this court lacks jurisdiction over the case without such prior ruling See Pause Technology LLC v. TiV0 Inc., 401 F.3d 1290, 1293-94 (Fed. Cir. 2005); see also Catlin u. United Stcztes, 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945) (f1nal judgment is a decision by the district court that "ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment."). CiVix urges rather than dismissal that the court direct the parties to jointly request that the district court enter judgment nunc pro tunc under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). We deem it the better course to dismiss the appeal without prejudice to Civix requesting the district court to enter judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) on its own. Accordingly, IT ls 0RDEnED THAT:

3 CIVIX-DDI V. HOTELS.COM (1) Hotel.com’s motion is granted The appeal is dis- missed. (2) Each side shall bear their own costs. FOR THE COURT 0 1 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date J an Horbaly' Clerk ccc Raymond P. Niro, Esq. Atif N. Khawaja, Esq. s19 _ 1ssUED As MANDATE; fm 9 1 ?9l? FlLED U.S.=_CDUBT 0F APPEALS FOF| THE FEDEHAL ClHCUlT NAY 01 2012 .|AN l-l0RBAL¥ CLERK

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

NOTE: This order is n0nprecedentia1. United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit CIVIX-DDI, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. HOTELS.COM GP, LLC AND HOTELS.COM, L.P., Defen,dants-Appellees. 4 2011-1599 Appea1 from the United States District C0urt for the N0rthern District of I11inois in case n0. 05-CV-6869, Judge Amy J. St. Eve. ON MOTION - Bef0re RADER, Chief Judge, LINN and PROST, C11rcuit Ju.dges. RADER, Chief Judge. 0 R D E R H0te1s.c0m GP, LLC et a1. move to dismiss Civix-DDI, LLC’s appeal for lack of jmisdicti011. CiVix 0pp0se. H0te1s.c0m replies

CIVlX-DDl V. I-IOTELS.COM 2 Civix’s appeal arises out of a suit it brought in the United States District Court for the Northern District of lllinois charging Hotels.com with infringement of 53 claims of ibm patents. Hotels.com asserted four counterclaims, including declaratory judgment of non-infringement invalidity of the patents asserted, unenforceability of the patents asserted, and breach of contract. On Aug'ust 19, 2011, the district court granted summary judgment of non-infringement on the patent claims asserted. Despite not addressing Hotels.com’s counterclaims the district court ordered the clerk of the court to enter judgment on behalf of the defendant and terminate the case. On September 15, 2011, Civix filed its notice of appeal. Civi_x does not dispute that the district court’s order did not rule on the pending counterclaims, and that this court lacks jurisdiction over the case without such prior ruling See Pause Technology LLC v. TiV0 Inc., 401 F.3d 1290, 1293-94 (Fed. Cir. 2005); see also Catlin u. United Stcztes, 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945) (f1nal judgment is a decision by the district court that "ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment."). CiVix urges rather than dismissal that the court direct the parties to jointly request that the district court enter judgment nunc pro tunc under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). We deem it the better course to dismiss the appeal without prejudice to Civix requesting the district court to enter judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) on its own. Accordingly, IT ls 0RDEnED THAT:

3 CIVIX-DDI V. HOTELS.COM (1) Hotel.com’s motion is granted The appeal is dis- missed. (2) Each side shall bear their own costs. FOR THE COURT 0 1 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date J an Horbaly' Clerk ccc Raymond P. Niro, Esq. Atif N. Khawaja, Esq. s19 _ 1ssUED As MANDATE; fm 9 1 ?9l? FlLED U.S.=_CDUBT 0F APPEALS FOF| THE FEDEHAL ClHCUlT NAY 01 2012 .|AN l-l0RBAL¥ CLERK

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Civix--Ddi, LLC v. hotels.com Gp., LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/civix-ddi-llc-v-hotelscom-gp-llc-cafc-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack