Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 537.0

529US2

Unit: $U49

[10-24-00 10:29:50] PAGES PGT: OPIN

462

NELSON v. ADAMS USA, INC.

Opinion of the Court

mission that Nelson waived the due process issues presented here is
unavailing because his counsel explained in the Federal Circuit that the
core of Nelson’s argument was the fundamental unfairness of imposing
judgment without going through the litigation process the Rules pre-
scribe. Further, both the majority and the dissent below understood
that an issue before them concerned the process due after Adams’ post-
judgment motion. Also rejected is Adams’ essential position that there
was sufﬁcient identity between Nelson and OCP to bind Nelson, with-
out further ado, to a judgment already entered against OCP. Because
Nelson, as president and sole shareholder of OCP, had withheld prior
art from the Patent Ofﬁce, had actual notice that Adams was seeking
to collect a fee award from OCP, was the “effective controller” of the
litigation for OCP, and had personally participated as a witness at the
hearing on whether OCP had engaged in inequitable conduct, the Fed-
eral Circuit concluded that nothing different or additional would have
Judicial predic-
been done had Nelson been a party from the outset.
tions about the outcome of hypothesized litigation cannot substitute for
the actual opportunity to defend that due process affords every party
against whom a claim is stated. The decision here does not insulate
Nelson from liability, but simply ensures him the right, afforded by due
process, to contest on the merits his personal liability for fees originally
sought and awarded solely against OCP. Pp. 469–472.

175 F. 3d 1343, reversed and remanded.

Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Debra J. Dixon argued the cause for petitioner. With her

on the briefs was James L. Deese.

Jack Allen Wheat argued the cause for respondents.
With him on the brief were Vance Armentrout Smith, Joel
Thomas Beres, and John William Scruton.

Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court.
This litigation began when Ohio Cellular Products Cor-
poration (OCP) sued respondent Adams USA, Inc. (Adams),
claiming patent infringement. The District Court eventu-
ally dismissed OCP’s claim and ordered OCP to pay Adams’
costs and attorney fees. Adams feared that OCP might be
unable to pay the fee award and therefore sought a means
to recover from petitioner Nelson, president and sole share-