No. 19-1378

Phazzer Electronics, Inc. v. Taser International, Inc.

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2020-06-16
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: ex-parte-review federal-circuit patent-cancellation patent-claims patent-damages remand standing uspto-cancellation uspto-reexamination
Key Terms:
Trademark Patent JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-10-09 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is the Federal Circuit's affirmation of patent damages correct in light of the USPTO's cancellation of the patent claims?

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED While this patent case was pending on appeal, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO”) issued a judgment in an ex parte reexamination invalidating all patent claims on which the Patentee based its infringement claims, and then the USPTO issued a Reexamination Certificate cancelling all of those patent claims. Unfortunately, the Federal Circuit refused to stay the case, a mere nine weeks so that a review that USPTO judgment could be made, necessitating the present Petition for Writ of Certiorari and/or, preferably, remand to the Federal Circuit. Due to the cancellation of the patent claims by the USPTO, all orders related to these patent claims are void ab initio. Petitioner requests that either this Petition for Writ of Certiorari be granted or, preferably, the issue be remanded to the Federal Circuit for reconsideration of its Order affirming the District Court judgment so that the action can be remanded to District Court to vacate the patent damages. The questions presented are: 1) Is the Federal Circuit affirmation of the patent damages now incorrect in light of the change of circumstances created by the USPTO cancellation of all patent claims? 2) Is remand to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit timely and appropriate in light of the change of circumstances created by the USPTO cancellation of all patent claims? ii 3) Does Respondent lack standing to assert said patent claims since the USPTO cancellation of all patent claims? iii PETITIONER’S CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS AND

Docket Entries

2020-10-13
Petition DENIED.
2020-10-08
Supplemental brief of petitioner Phazzer Electroinics, Inc. filed.
2020-10-05
Supplemental brief of respondent Taser International, Inc., filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-09-18
Reply of petitioner Phazzer Electroinics, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-04
Brief of respondent Taser International, Inc., in opposition filed.
2020-08-05
Response Requested. (Due September 4, 2020)
2020-07-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-17
Waiver of right of respondent Taser International, Inc. to respond filed.
2020-06-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 16, 2020)

Attorneys

Phazzer Electroinics, Inc.
Joseph Asher DavidowWillis & Davidow, LLC, Petitioner
Joseph Asher DavidowWillis & Davidow, LLC, Petitioner
Taser International, Inc.,
Pamela B. PetersenAxon Enterprise, Inc., Respondent
Pamela B. PetersenAxon Enterprise, Inc., Respondent