Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-00865/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-00865-40/pdf.json

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

---

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

VERINATA HEALTH, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SEQUENOM, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 12-cv-00865-SI 

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO 

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

On February 2, 2015, the Court denied cross-motions for summary judgment filed by 

Stanford and CHUK, and sua sponte stayed the action pending the Federal Circuit’s resolution of 

the appeal from Biogen Idec MA, Inc. v. Japanese Found. for Cancer Research, No. CIV. 13-

13061-FDS, 2014 WL 2167677 (D. Mass. May 22, 2014), which found that the proper forum for 

§ 146 appeals from PTAB interference proceedings declared after September 16, 2012 is the 

Federal Circuit, not a district court. Docket No. 345. This Court found that if the Federal Circuit 

affirmed the Biogen ruling, it would likely deprive this Court of subject matter jurisdiction over 

this case. On May 5, 2015, the Court denied Stanford’s motion for reconsideration of its decision 

to stay the litigation. Docket No. 351. Two days later, the Federal Circuit affirmed, thereby 

depriving this Court of subject matter jurisdiction. Biogen MA, Inc. v. Japanese Found. for Cancer 

Research, 785 F.3d 648 (Fed. Cir. 2015). On August 25, 2015, the parties informed the Court that 

the Federal Circuit had denied appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc. Docket No. 362. 

When a court lacks jurisdiction over a case before it, it may, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, 

Case 3:12-cv-00865-SI Document 363 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 2
2

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

“transfer such action or appeal to any other such court in which the action or appeal could have 

been brought at the time it was filed or noticed.” Accordingly, the Court transfers Stanford’s 

appeal of Interferences 105,920, 105,923, and 105,924 to the Federal Circuit. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 27, 2015

______________________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:12-cv-00865-SI Document 363 Filed 08/27/15 Page 2 of 2