Error: Expected the default config, but wasn't able to find it, or it isn't a Dictionary
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2007-1088
WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION and WHIRLPOOL PATENTS COMPANY,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
LG ELECTRONICS, INC. and LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC.,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,
Defendant-Appellee.
ON MOTION
Before NEWMAN, RADER, and LINN, Circuit Judges.
RADER, Circuit Judge.
ORDER
LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (LG) move to dismiss the
appeal filed by Whirlpool Corporation and Whirlpool Patents Company (Whirlpool). LG
states that General Electric Company joins the motion. Whirlpool opposes. LG replies.
The parties also submit letters in support of their positions.
Whirlpool sued LG and General Electric for infringement of two patents. LG and
General Electric filed counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement
of both patents, declaratory judgments of invalidity of both patents on various grounds,
and a declaratory judgment of unenforceability of one of the patents. The parties filed
various motions for summary judgment, but LG and General Electric did not file motions
for summary judgment concerning all issues underlying the declaratory judgment
counterclaims. The district court granted summary judgment of noninfringement of the
first patent and invalidity of the second patent. The district court denied the other
summary judgment motions as moot and entered a “judgment.” Whirlpool filed an
appeal.
Whirlpool argues that it can appeal, despite the lack of entry of a judgment
dismissing or denying the defendants’ counterclaims, because the district court’s intent
to deny those counterclaims is clear from the circumstances. We disagree. As LG
notes, the defendants’ motions for summary judgment did not raise all of the issues that
are raised by the counterclaims. Thus, by denying summary judgment only on the
issues raised by motions for summary judgment, the district court did not clearly decide
all of the relief sought by the counterclaimants.
Because not all claims for relief were disposed of, and no judgment was entered
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), there is no final judgment and the appeal must be
dismissed as premature. Nystrom v. Trex Co., Inc., 339 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2003);
International Elec. Tech. Corp. v. Hughes Aircraft Co., --- F.3d ---, 2007 WL 189341
(Fed. Cir. Jan. 26, 2007).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The motion to dismiss is granted.
(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
FOR THE COURT
_____March 1, 2007_________ /s/ Randall R. Rader_______
Date Randall R. Rader
Circuit Judge
2007-1088 -2-
cc: David A. Boehnen, Esq.
Larry S. Nixon, Esq.
Richard L. Stroup, Esq.
s8
ISSUED AS A MANDATE: ______________________
2007-1088 -3-