Court Opinion

ID: 9488381
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 12:43:12.473204+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:52:50.575670
License: Public Domain

NIES, Circuit Judge,
dissenting from Order declining the suggestion for rehearing in banc, with whom ARCHER, Chief Judge, and PLAGER, Circuit Judge, join.
International Rectifier sued SGS-Thomson for patent infringement. International Rectifier sought only an injunction barring future infringement. SGS-Thomson counterclaimed for a declaratory judgment of nonin-fringement, invalidity, and unenforceability, and demanded a jury trial. The district court granted International Rectifier’s motion to strike the jury trial demand. By a petition for a writ of mandamus, SGS-Thomson sought an order for a jury trial on its declaratory judgment counterclaims. On April 25, 1995, a panel of this court issued an Order granting SGS-Thomson’s petition in part, directing the court to reinstate SGS-Thomson’s jury demand, except on the equitable count of unenforceability. This court now denies International Rectifier’s request for rehearing in banc.
The panel relied on the controlling precedent of In re Lockwood, 30 USPQ2d 1292 (Fed.Cir.1994), vacated, reh’g granted, and reh’g in banc denied, 50 F.3d 966, 33 USPQ2d 1406, 33 USPQ2d 1907 (Fed.Cir.1995) (Nies, J., dissenting from denial of reh’g in banc), cert. granted sub nom. American Airlines, Inc. v. Lockwood, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 2274, 132 L.Ed.2d 279 (1995). I dissent from the denial of in banc here for *863the reasons set forth in my Lockwood dissent.