TEK Global S.R.L. et.al. v. Sealant Systems International Inc. et.al.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by Judge Vince Chhabria on 4/6/2017. (knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2017)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
TEK GLOBAL, S.R.L., ET AL.,
Case No. 11-cv-00774-VC
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND
SEALANT SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL,
INC, ET AL.,
In light of the jury's verdict, the Court concludes that SSI has failed to meet its burden on
obviousness for any of the asserted claims of the '110 patent. See generally In re
Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsule Patent Litig., 676 F.3d 1063, 1068
(Fed. Cir. 2012). Holtzhauser was the only reference alleged to have disclosed the three-way
valve with an additional hose, and the jury found that reference to be outside the scope and
content of the prior art. See Dkt. No. 511 at 2. SSI might have intended to fill the gap created by
Holtzhauser's absence with the background knowledge available to a person of ordinary skill in
the art – an industrywide familiarity with three-way valves and additional hoses, for example.
But the jury's findings on secondary considerations effectively foreclose that possibility. See
Dkt. No. 511 at 5. TEK's tire repair kit reflected five objective indicia of nonobviousness –
commercial success, long-felt need, copying by others, unexpected and superior results, and
"other evidence" – and no objective indicia of obviousness. Against that backdrop, the Court
cannot conclude that the prior existence of the basic mechanical elements of the asserted claims
renders those claims obvious over the prior art.
If SSI intends to challenge the jury's factual findings on invalidity, it may do so in an
appropriate post-trial motion notwithstanding this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 6, 2017
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?