Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05038/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05038-27/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

Case No. 13-cv-05038 NC 

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ENPLAS DISPLAY DEVICE 

CORPORATION, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SEOUL SEMICONDUCTOR 

COMPANY, LTD.,

Defendant.

Case No. 13-cv-05038 NC 

ORDER ON INVALIDITY CLAIMS 

38-39, 41-43, 45-48 OF ’554 PATENT

The parties dispute whether EDD can seek a jury finding of invalidity on claims 38-

39, 41-43, and 45-48 of the ‘554 patent, when the Court has already entered a summary 

judgment order of noninfringement as to these claims. Dkt. No. 224. “A district court 

judge faced with an invalidity counterclaim challenging a patent that it concludes was not 

infringed may either hear the claim or dismiss it without prejudice, subject to review only 

for abuse of discretion.” Liquid Dynamics Corp. v. Vaughan Co., Inc., 355 F.3d 1361, 

1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Here, the parties have prepared for trial on these invalidity 

counterclaims, and the Court expects that EDD will remain within the time limits set to 

present its case. Thus, the Court permits the invalidity claims 38-39, 41-43, and 45-48 of 

the ‘554 patent to proceed at trial. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 29, 2016 _____________________________________

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:13-cv-05038-NC Document 385 Filed 02/29/16 Page 1 of 1