Sca Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, Llc,

137 S.Ct. 954 (2017)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

In October 2003, P sent a letter to D alleging that First Quality was making and selling products that infringed P’s rights under the ’646 patent. D responded that one of its patents, '649, antedated the ’646 patent and revealed “the same diaper construction.” D maintained, the ’646 patent was invalid and could not support an infringement claim. P sent no further correspondence regarding the ’646 patent, and D proceeded to develop and market its products. In July 2004, without notifying D, P asked the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to initiate a reexamination proceeding to determine whether the ’646 patent was valid in light of '649 patent. Three years later, in March 2007, the PTO issued a certificate confirming the validity of the ’646 patent. In August 2010, P filed this patent infringement action against D. D moved for summary judgment based on laches and equitable estoppel, and the District Court granted that motion on both grounds. P appealed to the Federal Circuit, but before the Federal Circuit panel issued its decision, the Supreme Court decided Petrella. The panel still held based on a Federal Circuit precedent, A. C. Aukerman Co. v. R. L. Chaides Constr. Co., that P’s claims were barred by laches. The Federal Circuit then reheard the case en banc in order to reconsider Aukerman in light of Petrella. The en banc court reaffirmed Aukerman’s holding that laches can be asserted to defeat a claim for damages incurred within the 6-year period set out in the Patent Act. The en banc court concluded that Congress, in enacting the Patent Act, had “codified a laches defense” that “barred recovery of legal remedies.” The Supreme Court granted certiorari.