Court Opinion

ID: 9352457
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-06 16:00:53.814695+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:03:00.441632
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-1794    Document: 71    Page: 1    Filed: 01/06/2023

        NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

                DIONEX SOFTRON GMBH,
                       Appellant

                            v.

          AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
                      Appellee
               ______________________

                        2021-1794
                  ______________________

     Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark
 Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 106,087.
                   ______________________

                 Decided: January 6, 2023
                  ______________________

     ANDREW JAMES ISBESTER, Kilpatrick Townsend &
 Stockton LLP, San Francisco, CA, argued for appellant.
 Also represented by BYRON ROBERT CHIN; KRISTOPHER L.
 REED, Dallas, TX.

    JOHN B. SGANGA, JR., Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear,
 LLP, Irvine, CA, argued for appellee. Also represented by
 EDWARD M. CANNON, PHILIP MARK NELSON.
                  ______________________

     Before REYNA, CHEN, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
Case: 21-1794    Document: 71      Page: 2    Filed: 01/06/2023

 2       DIONEX SOFTRON GMBH   v. AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

 STARK, Circuit Judge.
      The outcome in this patent case depends on the out-
 come in a separate case also decided today: Dionex Softron
 GmbH v. Agilent Technologies, Inc., No. 21-2372 (“Dionex
 I”).
      In this case, as in Dionex I, Dionex Softron GmbH (“Di-
 onex”) appeals the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s
 (“Board”) judgment in an interference proceeding, award-
 ing priority to Agilent Technologies, Inc. (“Agilent”). As in
 Dionex I, the parties here dispute whether the Board erred
 in its determinations of priority, conception, and reduction
 to practice. The parties here raise essentially the same ar-
 guments and counter-arguments with respect to those is-
 sues. Compare Opening Br. 27-50 with Dionex I Opening
 Br. 44-64; Response Br. 37-75 with Dionex I Response Br.
 14-65; Reply Br. 18-27 with Dionex I Reply Br. 2-24; see also
 Dionex I, Oral Arg. at 0:22-0:34 (counsel for Dionex stating
 that priority issues in both cases were “essentially identi-
 cal”).
     As in Dionex I, Dionex contends that the Board erred
 because it awarded priority to Agilent based on a determi-
 nation of actual reduction to practice that was insuffi-
 ciently corroborated. Although this case and Dionex I
 involve different patent applications and a different inter-
 ference count, both cases involve essentially the same tech-
 nology, and the Board relied upon essentially the identical
 evidence and analysis in awarding Agilent’s patent appli-
 cation priority over Dionex’s patent application in both
 cases.
     In Dionex I, we affirmed the Board’s award of priority
 to Agilent’s patent application. We incorporate by refer-
 ence our opinion in Dionex I and, for the same reasons
 stated therein, we affirm the Board’s award of priority to
 Agilent’s patent application in this case. As in Dionex I,
 the Board in this case did not err in awarding priority to
 Agilent based on finding that Agilent’s actual reduction to
Case: 21-1794    Document: 71       Page: 3   Filed: 01/06/2023

 DIONEX SOFTRON GMBH   v. AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.        3

 practice preceded Dionex’s earliest alleged date of concep-
 tion. Also, as in Dionex I, the Board’s determination here
 that Agilent’s reduction to practice was sufficiently corrob-
 orated under the rule of reason analysis is supported by
 substantial evidence. 1 For those reasons, we affirm the
 Board’s judgment.
                        AFFIRMED
                            COSTS
 No costs.

     1    As in Dionex I, we have considered all of the par-
 ties’ arguments in addition to those we explicitly address
 and find them unpersuasive.