Sig Sauer Inc. et al v. Freed Designs, Inc.
///ORDER denying 83 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. So Ordered by Judge Steven J. McAuliffe.(lat)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Sig Sauer, Inc.; Check-Mate
Industries, Inc.; Check-Mate
International Products, Inc.;
Nordon, Inc.; and Thomas
Pierce d/b/a Pierce Designs,
Case No. 14-cv-461-SM
Opinion No. 2017 DNH 189
Freed Designs, Inc.,
O R D E R
Patentee’s motion for partial summary judgment dismissing
the affirmative defense of anticipation with respect to Claims 1
and 4 of the patent in suit (document no. 83), is denied.
Invalidity due to anticipation is a question of fact.
Holdings LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.3d 1377, 1380 (Fed. Cir.
Although a question of fact, anticipation may still be
resolved on summary judgment if the record reveals no genuine
dispute of material fact, and if no reasonable jury could find
that the patent is anticipated.
Telemac Cellular Corp. v. Topp
Telecom, Inc., 247 F.3d 1316, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
Here, the alleged infringer has proffered sufficient
evidence in the nature of relevant prior art and expert opinion
testimony, that, if believed by a jury, would permit a finding
by clear and convincing evidence that the claims at issue are
At the very least, the alleged infringer has plainly
identified material facts that are genuinely disputed, thereby
rendering summary judgment with respect to the anticipation
“A [prior] reference may anticipate
inherently if a claim limitation that is not expressly disclosed
is necessarily present, or inherent, in the single anticipating
In re Hugh Edward Montgomery, et al., 677 F.3d 1375,
1379 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (internal citations and quotation
Mr. Wood, plaintiff’s expert, an apparent person of
ordinary skill in the relevant art, has opined that a number of
prior references anticipate the claims at issue, and it cannot
be said on this record that there are no material facts
genuinely disputed or that the patentee is entitled to relief as
a matter of law with respect to the anticipation defense.
The motion for partial summary judgment (document no. 83)
is necessarily denied.
Steven J. McAuliffe
United States District Judge
September 14, 2017
Laura L. Carroll, Esq.
Zachary R. Gates, Esq.
Neal E. Friedman, Esq.
Michael J. Bujold, Esq.
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?