Nystrom v. Trex Company, Inc. et al. (Fed. Cir.)

June 28, 2004 on 12:01 pm | In Caselaw |

Nystrom v. Trex Company, Inc. et al.
Federal Circuit, June 28, 2004
Before MAYER, Chief Judge, GAJARSA, and LINN, Circuit Judges.
Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge LINN.

Ron Nystrom (“Nystrom”) appeals from the grant of summary judgment of non-infringement of claims 1-15 and of invalidity of claims 18-20 of his U.S. Patent No. 5,474,831 (“the ’831 patent”) and from an order denying sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 [Counsel’s liability for excessive costs], entered by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in favor of defendants TREX Company, Inc. and TREX Company, LLC (collectively “TREX”). Nystrom v. TREX Co., Inc., No. 2:01cv905 (E.D. Va. Oct. 25, 2002) (original final judgment); Nystrom v. TREX Co., Inc., No. 2:01cv905 (E.D. Va. Oct. 21, 2003) (amended final judgment). Because the district court erroneously construed certain claim limitations and erred in not properly applying our precedent relating to invalidity, we reverse the district court’s summary judgments of non-infringement and invalidity and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings. Further, because the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Nystrom’s motion for sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927, we affirm the district court’s disposition of that motion.

GAJARSA, Circuit Judge, dissenting-in-part.

I agree with the majority’s conclusions with respect to validity and the affirmance of the district court’s refusal to award sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s construction of the terms “board” and “manufactured to have.”

 Print This Post |  Email This Post | | Subscribe via e-mail

Related Posts:

• Toro v. Deere (Fed. Cir. 2004)
• International Rectifier Corp. v. Ixys Corp. (Fed. Cir.)
• Federal Circuit update II