Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03955/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03955-18/pdf.json

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

---

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

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

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF

CALIFORNIA, ABBOTT MOLECULAR INC., and

ABBOTT LABORATORIES INC.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DAKO NORTH AMERICA, INC. and DAKO A/S,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 05-03955 MHP

ORDER

Re: Motion to Certify for Appeal

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and

Stay Proceedings

On October 11, 2006, plaintiffs The Regents of the University of California, Abbott

Molecular Inc. and Abbott Laboratories Inc. filed a motion to certify for immediate appeal to the

Federal Circuit this court’s July 31, 2006 summary judgment order. Specifically, plaintiffs seek

review of the determination that plaintiffs’ ’479 patent was not infringed by the accused products

and that prosecution history estoppel barred claims of infringement of plaintiffs’ ’841 patent by two

of the twenty-two accused products. Plaintiffs will seek to consolidate review of the summary

judgment order with review of this court’s prior preliminary injunction order, which plaintiffs

previously appealed and is currently pending before the Federal Circuit. Defendants have filed a

statement of non-opposition to plaintiffs’ motion to certify for appeal. 

//

//

//

Case 3:05-cv-03955-MHP Document 184 Filed 12/15/06 Page 1 of 2
UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

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

Because the summary judgment order raises a controlling question of law on which there are

substantial grounds for difference of opinion, and because an immediate appeal may materially

advance the ultimate termination of the litigation, the court GRANTS plaintiffs’ motion to certify for

appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1292(b). All further proceedings in this action are STAYED

until further notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 

MARILYN HALL PATEL

District Judge

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Case 3:05-cv-03955-MHP Document 184 Filed 12/15/06 Page 2 of 2