Yufa v. Lighthouse Worldwide Solutions Inc.

Filing 142

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SUA SPONTE DISMISSAL. Show Cause Response due by 11/26/2019. Signed by Judge Thomas S. Hixson on 11/12/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/12/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ALEKSANDR L. YUFA,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10
11

Case No. 09-cv-00968-TSH

v.
LIGHTHOUSE WORLDWIDE
SOLUTIONS INC.,

NOTICE OF SUA SPONTE
INTENTION TO DISMISS
COMPLAINT

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendant.
12
13

Plaintiff Aleksander L. Yufa filed this case on March 5, 2009, alleging Defendant

14

Lighthouse Worldwide Solutions, Inc. infringed upon his patent for particle detectors and

15

reference voltage comparators, Patent No. 6,346,983. The case has been stayed since January 9,

16

2015 pending resolution of four of Yufa’s other cases involving the ‘983 Patent. ECF No. 136.

17

However, on September 12, 2019, Yufa filed a Notice of Change of Ownership of Patent at Issue,

18

stating that he filed the assignment of the ‘983 Patent in compliance with Magistrate Judge Kandis

19

Westmore’s order in Yufa v. TSI Incorp., C-09-1315, and therefore “doesn’t own anymore the

20

patent at issue.” ECF No. 137.

21

“‘A trial court may dismiss a claim sua sponte under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).’” Seismic

22

Reservoir 2020, Inc. v. Paulsson, 785 F.3d 330, 335 (9th Cir. 2015) (quoting Omar v. Sea-Land

23

Serv., Inc., 813 F.2d 986, 991 (9th Cir. 1987)). The district court “must give notice of its sua

24

sponte intention to dismiss and provide the plaintiff with ‘an opportunity to at least submit a

25

written memorandum in opposition to such motion.’” Id. (quoting Wong v. Bell, 642 F.2d 359,

26

362 (9th Cir. 1981)). However, a court may properly dismiss an action sua sponte without giving

27

a plaintiff notice of its intention to dismiss and an opportunity to respond if a plaintiff “cannot

28

possibly win relief.” Sparling v. Hoffman Construction Co., 864 F.2d 635, 638 (9th Cir. 1988);

1
2

Omar, 813 F.2d at 991; Wong, 642 F.2d at 362.
Here, Yufa admits he doesn’t own the ‘983 Patent. A complaint for patent infringement

3

requires that the plaintiff owns the patent. K-Tech Telecomms., Inc. v. Time Warner Cable, Inc.,

4

714 F.3d 1277, 1283 (Fed. Cir. 2013). As such, it appears that Yufa has no standing to sue and

5

dismissal is appropriate. Accordingly, the Court hereby GIVES NOTICE to Yufa of its intention

6

to dismiss the complaint sua sponte without leave to amend. Yufa may file a written

7

memorandum in opposition to dismissal by November 26, 2019.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

Dated: November 12, 2019

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
THOMAS S. HIXSON
United States Magistrate Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2