[Download] "Crater Corporation v. Lucent Technologies" by In the Court of Appeals Court of Appeals State of Arizona Division Two Department B # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Crater Corporation v. Lucent Technologies
• Author : In the Court of Appeals Court of Appeals State of Arizona Division Two Department B
• Release Date : January 06, 2001
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 70 KB

Description

Crater Corporation ("Crater") sued Lucent Technologies, Inc. and American Telephone and Telegraph Company (collectively, "Lucent") in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri alleging that Lucent infringed Craters U.S. Patent No. 5,286,129 (the " 129 patent"). The 129 patent is directed to an underwater coupling device (the "Crater coupler"). Crater also alleged state-law claims against Lucent for breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets. Lucent moved to dismiss Craters complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and, in the alternative, for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Citing 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a), Lucent argued that it was not liable for patent infringement because any work it performed with respect to the Crater coupler was done under a government project and was authorized by the United States. Pursuant to § 1498(a), a private party cannot be held liable for infringement for any goods "used or manufactured by or for the United States." See Va. Panel Corp. v. MAC Panel Co., 133 F.3d 860, 869, 45 USPQ2d 1225, 1232 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Lucent argued that the state law claims should be dismissed because there was no diversity of citizenship between Crater and Lucent, and since the district court lacked jurisdiction over the patent claims, due to § 1498(a), it could not exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims. In due course, the district court concluded that Lucents allegedly infringing activities were for the government and dismissed Craters complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Crater Corp. v. Lucent Techs., No. 4: 98CV00913 ERW (E.D. Mo. Aug. 25, 1999) (memorandum and order) ("Crater II"). Crater appeals the district courts ruling.

Download Free Books "Crater Corporation v. Lucent Technologies" PDF ePub Kindle