Free Response - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Louis J. Hoffman (Ariz. State Bar #009722) 14614 N. Kierland Blvd., Ste. 300 Scottsdale, Arizona 85254 Tel.: (480) 948-3295 Fax: (480) 948-3387 Victoria Gruver Curtin (Ariz. State Bar #010897) 14614 N. Kierland Blvd., Ste. 300 Scottsdale, Arizona 85254 Tel.: (480) 998-3547 Fax: (480) 948-3387 Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Lemelson Medical, Education & Research Foundation, Limited Partnership, Plaintiff, vs. CompUSA, Inc., et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CIV 00-0663 PHX (HRH) RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES BY SYSTEMAX, INC.

Plaintiff Lemelson Medical, Education & Research Foundation, Limited Partnership respectfully submits that the Court should deny the motion for attorney's fees by defendant Systemax, Inc. First, Systemax seeks fees only under the authority of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), allowing imposition of "terms and conditions" on a voluntary dismissal where the dismissal requires an order of the Court. Rule 41(a)(1) allows a plaintiff to dismiss certain types of defendants without stipulation, motion, or Court

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

1

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 1 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

order, and thus the "terms and conditions" that can be imposed on dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) could not be requested. Because some defendants in this action have answered and others not, Plaintiff sought to dismiss all defendants in a single motion, hoping to streamline the procedure. Defendant Systemax seeks to rely on the fact that Plaintiff filed a motion to impose a condition of an award of fees. No other defendant asked for fees as a condition of dismissal under Rule 41 (either in this case or any companion case). However, Plaintiff is entitled to unconditional dismissal of Systemax under Rule 41(a)(1). Systemax never answered the Complaint, and the action was stayed. Plaintiff has withdrawn its motion to dismiss Systemax and filed a notice of dismissal of Systemax under Rule 41(a)(1)(i). The provision of Rule 41(a)(2) allowing imposition of terms and conditions thus does not apply. Thus, Systemax's motion should be denied as moot in view of Lemelson's dismissal of Systemax as of right. Second, Plaintiff both moved for and noticed dismissal of Systemax with prejudice. While the Ninth Circuit has not addressed the issue, it is generally held that Rule 41(a)(2) does not support the award of attorneys' fees as a condition of a dismissal with prejudice: When a plaintiff dismisses an action without prejudice, a district court may seek to reimburse the defendant for his attorneys' fees because he faces a risk that the plaintiff will refile suit and impose duplicative expenses upon him. In contrast, when a plaintiff dismisses an action with prejudice, attorneys' fees are usually not a proper condition of dismissal because the defendant cannot be made to defend again. Aerotech, Inc. v. Estes, 110 F.3d 1523, 1528 (10th Cir. 1997) (citations omitted) (see also cases cited therein). Third, an award of fees would be inappropriate in this case. See Stevedoring Services of America v. Armilla Int'l B.V., 889 F.2d 919, 921-22 (9th Cir. 1989) (an award of fees under Rule 41(a)(2) is not automatic, consideration of various factors is appropriate). Plaintiff filed this action on April 14, 2000. At that time, no court had found that the patents asserted herein were invalid or unenforceable; in fact, the Nevada district court in Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Lemelson Medical, Education & Research
2

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 2 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Foundation, Limited Partnership had found that the defense of prosecution laches did not exist as a matter of law just one month earlier. This action was stayed pending the outcome of the Symbol case. The Nevada court's ruling that the defense did not exist was appealed on an interlocutory basis to the Federal Circuit, which reversed and remanded, after which a 25-day trial was held, followed by an appeal to the Federal Circuit. Lemelson sought dismissal of this case promptly after the Federal Circuit issued its final ruling finding all claims of the patents unenforceable based only on the resurrected doctrine of prosecution laches. See Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Lemelson Medical, Education & Research Foundation, Limited Partnership, 429 F.3d 1051 (Fed. Cir. 2005). This is not an appropriate case for fee shifting in the absence of some statutory basis for fees, such as the "exceptional case" provision of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. §285. The Court should exercise its discretion to deny Systemax's motion for fees. Fourth, the motion was not timely. The motion for attorneys' fees is properly a cross-motion to Plaintiff's motion to dismiss, as it seeks relief related directly to, and indeed a condition on granting, that motion.1 As such, it should have been filed with a response to the motion under Local Rule 7.2(c). Such responses were due not later than January 12, 2006 (the motion was filed December 22, 2005). Systemax' motion was not filed until one week later, January 19, 2006. It should be denied as untimely. Fifth, the motion does not present any evidence in support of the relief requested. Systemax has presented no evidence of the amount of fees sought or any backup to show that such amount is reasonable. While Local Rule 54.2 provides a procedure for submitting such materials after the initial motion, that rule applies to post-judgment applications, which this is not. There is no basis for Systemax's request that a

It is not a cross-motion to any other defendant's response to the motion to dismiss, including that of Liz Claiborne, Inc., as it does not seek any relief relating to such other defendant's response. Liz Claiborne merely sought a "condition" that it had the right to move for fees post-judgment, under Rule 54 and 35 U.S.C. §285, which is not needed as a condition because that right exists anyway. Systemax also joined Liz Claiborne's motion.
1

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

3

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 3 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

"submission schedule" be set, which would delay entry of judgment for all parties in this case. For any or all of the above reasons, the motion should be denied. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 26th day of January, 2006. VICTORIA GRUVER CURTIN, P.L.C. By:

Victoria Curtin

Victoria Curtin 14614 North Kierland Blvd., Suite 300 Scottsdale, Arizona 85254 Telephone: (480) 948-3295 Facsimile: (480) 948-3387 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

4

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 4 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b), I certify that on January 26, 2006, I personally caused to be served electronically and first-class mail, a true copy of the "Response in Opposition to Motion for Attorney's Fees By Systemax, Inc." to:

James W Armstrong [email protected] Michael A Beale [email protected] David P Berten [email protected] Peter J Brann [email protected] Robert R Brunelli [email protected] Paul E Burns [email protected] Timothy James Casey [email protected] Edward T Colbert [email protected] John E DeWulf [email protected] Jennifer Hadley Dioguardi [email protected] Brett L Dunkelman [email protected] Richard A Halloran [email protected] Ray Kendall Harris [email protected] Isabel Mary Humphrey [email protected] Susan Elizabeth Irwin [email protected], [email protected] Robert J Itri [email protected] Jonathan M James [email protected] Cheryl Lee Johnson [email protected] Michael K Kelly [email protected] John A Micheaels [email protected] Mark A Nadeau [email protected] Jennifer P Nore [email protected] Bradley W Petersen [email protected] Robert James Pohlman [email protected] Michael Rudolph Ross [email protected] Michael S Rubin [email protected] Barry Rockwell Sanders [email protected] Douglas W Seitz [email protected] Benjamin C Thomas [email protected] Donald A Wall [email protected] Darlene Marie Wauro [email protected] Laura Jean Zeman [email protected]

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

5

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 5 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

And to: Andrew Abraham Burch & Cracchiolo PA PO Box 16882 Phoenix, AZ 85011-6882 Hugh A Abrams Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP Bank 1 Plaza 10 S Dearborn St Chicago, IL 60603 Robert E B Allen Mariscal Weeks McIntyre & Friedlander PA 2901 N Central Ave, Ste 200 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2705 Larry C Boyd Ingram Micro Inc 1600 E St Andrew Pl Santa Ana, CA 92705 Kenneth R Chiate Pillsbury Winthrop LLP 725 S Figueroa St, Ste 2800 Los Angeles, CA 90017-5406 J Bennett Clark Senniger Powers Leavitt & Roedel 1 Metropolitan Sq, 16th Floor St Louis, MO 63102 Kevin B Collins Venable Baetjer Howard & Civiletti LLP 1201 New York Ave NW, Ste 1000 Washington, DC 20005-3917

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

6

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 6 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Jennifer E Cook Senniger Powers Leavitt & Roedel 1 Metropolitan Sq, 16th Floor St Louis, MO 63102 William D Coston Venable Baetjer Howard & Civiletti LLP 1201 New York Ave NW, Ste 1000 Washington, DC 20005-3917 John H Cotton John H Cotton & Associates Ltd 2300 W Sahara, Ste 420 Las Vegas, NV 89102 Rita Coyle DeMeules Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi LLP 2800 LaSalle Plaza 800 LaSalle Ave Minneapolis, MN 55402-2015 David W Denenberg Gibbons Del Deo Dolan Griffinger & Vecchione 1 Pennsylvania Plaza, 37th Fl New York, NY 10119 Martin I Eisenstein Brann & Isaacson LLP PO Box 3070 Lewiston, ME 04243-3070 Jesse Jenner Albert E Fey Ropes & Gray 1251 Ave of the Americas New York, NY 10020

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

7

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 7 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Mark A Flagel Latham & Watkins 633 W 5th St, Ste 4000 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2007 Lee A Freeman Freeman Freeman & Salzman PC 401 N Michigan Ave, Ste 3200 Chicago, IL 60611 John N Gallo Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP Bank 1 Plaza 10 S Dearborn St Chicago, IL 60603 Scott H Gingold Latham & Watkins 5800 Sears Tower 233 S Wacker Dr Chicago, IL 60606 Jennifer P Goetsch Marshall O'Toole Gerstein Murray & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr, Ste 6300 Chicago, IL 60606 Thomas O Gorman Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP 1919 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Ste 500 Washington, DC 20006 George Gottlieb Gottlieb Rackman & Reisman PC 270 Madison Ave, 8th Floor New York, NY 10016 Lee F Grossman Marshall O'Toole Gerstein Murray & Borun 233 S Wacker Dr, Ste 6300 Chicago, IL 60606

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

8

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 8 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Herbert J Hammond Thompson & Knight LLP 1700 Pacific Ave, Ste 3300 Dallas, TX 75201 John E Hedstrom Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP 1919 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Ste 500 Washington, DC 20006 Darin M Klemchuk Cash Klemchuk Powers Taylor LLP Campbell Centre II 8150 N Central Expressway, Ste 1575 Dallas, TX 75206 Emily S Lau Fenwick & West LLP 2 Palo Alto Sq, Ste 700 Palo Alto, CA 94306 James T Malysiak Freeman Freeman & Salzman PC 401 N Michigan Ave, Ste 3200 Chicago, IL 60611 Lisa Meyerhoff Jenkens & Gilchrist PC 1445 Ross Ave, Ste 3200 Dallas, TX 75202 David A Nelson Latham & Watkins 5800 Sears Tower 233 S Wacker Dr Chicago, IL 60606

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

9

Filed 01/26/2006

Page 9 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Bart James Patterson University & Community College 5550 W Flamingo Rd, Ste C-1 Las Vegas, NV 89103-0137 Lisa A Pieroni Kirschstein Ottinger Israel & Schiffmiller PC 489 5th Ave, 17th Floor New York, NY 10017 David Anthony Plumley Christie Parker & Hale LLP 350 W Colorado Blvd, Ste 500 Pasadena, CA 91105 Susan E Powley Jenkens & Gilchrist PC 1445 Ross Ave, Ste 3200 Dallas, TX 75202 Terryl K Qualey Merchant & Gould 3200 IDS Ctr 80 S 8th St Minneapolis, MN 55402-2215 James Samuel Rigberg Mariscal Weeks McIntyre & Friedlander PA 2901 N Central Ave, Ste 200 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2705 Martin W Schiffmiller Kirschstein Ottinger Israel & Schiffmiller PC 489 5th Ave, 17th Floor New York, NY 10017 Clyde A Shuman Cobrin & Gittes 750 Lexington Ave, Ste 21 New York, NY 10022

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

10 Filed 01/26/2006

Page 10 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

George M Sirilla Pillsbury Winthrop LLP 1600 Tysons Blvd McLean, VA 22102 Bruce S Sostek Thompson & Knight LLP 1700 Pacific Ave, Ste 3300 Dallas, TX 75201 Stefan V Stein Holland & Knight LLP 100 N Tampa St, Ste 4100 Tampa, FL 33602-3644 Jay Todd Stewart Perkins Coie Brown & Bain PA PO Box 400 Phoenix, AZ 85001-0400 Mark Michael Supko Kenyon & Kenyon 1500 K St NW, Ste 700 Washington, DC 20005-1257 Raymond L Sweigart Pillsbury Winthrop LLP 1600 Tysons Blvd McLean, VA 22102 William M Wesley McAndrews Held & Malloy Ltd 500 W Madison St, Ste 3400 Chicago, IL 60661 Christopher C Winslad! e McAndrews Held & Malloy Ltd 500 W Madison St, Ste 3400 Chicago, IL 60661

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

11 Filed 01/26/2006

Page 11 of 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Darryl M Woo Fenwick & West LLP 275 Battery St, Ste 1600 San Francisco, CA 94111-3305 Donald L Zachary Bass Berry & Sims PLC First American Ctr 315 Deaderick St, Ste 2700 Nashville, TN 37238-0002 Elizabeth L Zepeda 600 Citadel Dr Commerce, CA 90040 Norman H Zivin Cooper & Dunham LLP 1185 Ave of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Thomas Zych Thompson Hine & Flory LLP 3900 Key Ctr 127 Public Sq Cleveland, OH 44114-1216 A copy of the served by priority mail this 26th day of January, 2006, to: The Honorable H. Russel Holland United States District Court 222 West 7th Avenue ­ No. 54 Anchorage, Alaska 99513

/s/ Laura Keller Laura Keller

Case 2:00-cv-00663-HRH

Document 724

12 Filed 01/26/2006

Page 12 of 12