Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01411/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01411-56/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

-1- SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER 

GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT OF NO LOST-PROFITS 

DAMAGES 

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 

CHARLES J. ROGERS, admitted pro hac vice

CONLEY ROSE, P.C. 

600 Travis Street, Suite 7100 

Houston, Texas 77002-2912 

Telephone: (713) 238-8049 

Facsimile: (713) 238-8008 

e-mail: crogers@conleyrose.com

Attorneys for Defendant Cooper Cameron Corporation 

n/k/a Cameron International Corporation 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DUHN OIL TOOL, INC.,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant, 

vs. 

COOPER CAMERON CORPORATION, 

n/k/a CAMERON INTERNATIONAL 

CORPORATION 

Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

Case No. 1:05-cv-01411-OWW-GSA

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT 

CAMERON’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO 

FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING IN 

SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR 

PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF 

NO LOST PROFITS DAMAGES 

Hon. Oliver W. Wanger

Pending before this Court is Defendant Cooper Cameron Corporation, n/k/a Cooper 

Cameron Corporation, (“Cameron”)’s Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Briefing in 

Support of Cameron’s previously filed Motion (Doc. No. 319) for Partial Summary 

Judgment of No Lost Profits Damages. The Court hereby grants Cameron’s Motion for 

Leave. The Court further finds, as a matters of law, that: 

1. The Plaintiff Duhn Oil Tool, Inc. is precluded from claiming damages based 

on the alleged lost profits of its parent corporation Seaboard International, Inc., or any other 

corporate affiliate of Duhn Oil Tool, Inc. See Poly-America, L.P. v. GSE Lining 

Technology, Inc., 383 F.3d 1303, 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“While Poly-America may have 

the right to sue under its patents, both as an owner and as a back-licensee, it can only 

recover its own lost profits, not [its affiliate] Poly-Flex’s.”) 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:05-cv-01411-MLH-GSA Document 431 Filed 08/02/10 Page 1 of 2
-2- SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER 

GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT OF NO LOST-PROFITS 

DAMAGES 

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 

2. Duhn Oil Tool, Inc. became a non-operating holding company when it was 

acquired by Seaboard International, Inc. on December 19, 2007. Thus, Duhn Oil lacked the 

prerequisite marketing and manufacturing capability required to claim lost-profits damages 

accruing after that acquisition date. See Rite-Hite Corp v. Kelly Co., Inc., 56 F.3d 1538, 

1545 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (en banc) (“To recover lost profits damages, the patentee must show 

a reasonable probability that, ‘but for’ the infringement, it would have made the sales that 

were made by the infringer.”) (citing Panduit Corp. v. Stahlin Bros. Fibre Work, Inc., 575 

F.2d 1152, 1156 (6th Cir. 1978). The Panduit test requires that a patentee establish 

manufacturing and marketing capability to exploit a demand for the patented product. 

3. Seaboard International, Inc. is not a patentee as defined by 35 U.S.C. §§ 281 

and 284, and, thus, would lack constitutional standing to assert any claim for alleged 

infringement of the patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 6,920,925. 

4. Hearing Date: September 27, 2010 at 10:00a.m. in Courtroom 3 (7th Floor) before 

Judge Wanger. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 30, 2010 /s/ OLIVER W. WANGER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:05-cv-01411-MLH-GSA Document 431 Filed 08/02/10 Page 2 of 2