Corus Realty Holdings, Inc v. Zillow Group, Inc et al

Filing 133

ORDER REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT set for 2/14/2020 re Plaintiff's 65 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Regarding Invalidity, re: Zillow's 68 MOTION for Summary Judgment. In addition to the merits of the respective motions, the parties should be prepared to provide the court with additional citations to authorities, if warranted, and to address the issues referred to in this order. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9

CORUS REALTY HOLDINGS,
INC.,

10
11

Plaintiff,
12

CASE NO. C18-0847JLR
ORDER REGARDING ORAL
ARGUMENT

v.

13

ZILLOW GROUP, INC., et al.,

14

Defendants.

15
On February 7, 2020, the court set a hearing for February 14, 2020, to hear oral
16
argument on Defendants Zillow Group, Inc., Zillow, Inc., and Trulia, LLC’s
17
(collectively, “Zillow”) motion for summary judgment (Zillow MSJ (Dkt. # 68)) and
18
Plaintiff Corus Realty Holdings, Inc.’s (“Corus”) motion for partial summary judgment
19
regarding invalidity (Corus MPSJ (Dkt. # 65)). (See 2/7/20 Dkt. Entry.) In addition to
20
the merits of the respective motions, the parties should be prepared to provide the court
21
//
22

ORDER - 1

1

with additional citations to authorities, if warranted, and to address the following issues at

2

the February 14, 2020, hearing:

3

(1) Whether the court should dismiss Zillow’s counterclaim for a declaratory

4

judgment of noninfringement as moot if the court grants summary judgment in favor of

5

Zillow on Corus’s infringement claim. See Sliding Door Co. v. KLS Doors, LLC, No.

6

EDCV 13-00196 JGB, 2013 WL 2090298, at *4 (C.D. Cal. May 1, 2013) (dismissing a

7

defendant’s counterclaim for declaratory judgment of noninfringement as duplicative of

8

the plaintiff’s infringement claim because the counterclaim did “not serve any useful

9

purpose”); see also Medtronic, Inc. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC, 571 U.S. 191,

10

198 (2014) (holding that in a declaratory judgment action for noninfringement, “the

11

burden of persuasion is with the patentee, just as it would be had the patentee brought an

12

infringement suit”);

13

(2) Which of the following actions the court should take with respect to Zillow’s

14

counterclaim for a declaratory judgment of invalidity if the court grants summary

15

judgment in favor of Zillow on Corus’s infringement claim:

16

(a) Dismiss the counterclaim without prejudice;

17

(b) Stay the counterclaim and entertain a motion for entry of final judgment of

18
19

Corus’s infringement claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b); or
(c) Hear the claim on its merits.

20

See, e.g., Korszun v. Pub. Techs. Multimedia, Inc., 96 F. App’x 699, 700 (Fed. Cir. 2004)

21

(holding that where a district court has granted summary judgment of noninfringement,

22

the district court may hear an invalidity counterclaim on the merits, dismiss the

ORDER - 2

1

counterclaim, or, where proper, enter judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

2

54(b)); see also Nystrom v. TREX Co., 339 F.3d 1347, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2003); Nautilus

3

Grp., Inc. v. Icon Health And Fitness, Inc., 308 F. Supp. 2d 1224, 1226 (W.D. Wash.

4

2003).

5

Dated this 11th day of February, 2020.

6
7

A

8

JAMES L. ROBART
United States District Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

ORDER - 3