No. 18-303

Henryk Oleksy v. General Electric Company

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2018-09-12
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: appellate-procedure civil-procedure counterclaim-dismissal court-precedent due-process federal-circuit finality finality-of-judgment judgment-finality patent patent-law precedent supervisory-power
Key Terms:
DueProcess Patent
Latest Conference: 2018-10-12
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether district court judgment was final despite lack of express dismissal of invalidity counterclaim

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The date on which a district court judgment becomes final is critical to the federal appellate process. A number of critical deadlines for filings and submissions are computed from the date a district court’s judgment is final. Recognizing the importance of defining whether a judgment is a final judgment, this Court set forth specific criteria for making this determination. In United States v. F. & M. Schaefer Brewing Co., 356 U.S. 227 (1958), this Court held that the use of specific words is not required for a judgment to be final. The circumstances must show that the district court had an intention to terminate the case. Following this precedent, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that in patent cases for a judgment to be final a dismissal of an invalidity counterclaim need not be express. A district court can effectively dismiss a counterclaim. However, in the present case, a judgment was held not be final because an invalidity counterclaim was not expressly dismissed. It is therefore important that this Court grant the petition to review the following questions: 1. Whether this Court should exercise its supervisory power to assure that precedents are followed and reverse a decision that the district court judgment was not final because a counterclaim was not EXPRESSLY dismissed even though this counterclaim was effectively and necessarily dismissed by the district court? 2. Whether Due Process Rights of the Petitioner Were Violated When the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Without Opinion District Court’s Decision That Was Clearly Inconsistent with Precedents?

Docket Entries

2018-10-15
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/12/2018.
2018-09-18
Waiver of right of respondent General Electric Company to respond filed.
2018-09-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 12, 2018)

Attorneys

General Electric Company
Marla ButlerRobins Kaplan LLP, Respondent
Marla ButlerRobins Kaplan LLP, Respondent
Henryk Oleksy
Slawomir Zbigniew SzczepanskiSzczepanski Law Firm, Petitioner
Slawomir Zbigniew SzczepanskiSzczepanski Law Firm, Petitioner