Hewlett-Packard (HP) (plaintiff) filed a declaratory judgment action alleging that the ‘684 reissue patent, assigned to Bausch & Lomb (B&L) (defendant), was invalid and that HP did not infringe. B&L obtained the rights to the ‘950 patent in a defensive maneuver against HP, as the two companies were competitors in the mathematical device market, specifically in X-Y Plotters. Fearing that the ‘950 patent was too broad, B&L sought reissue with several new narrower claims, these new claims drawn to the HP market X-Y Plotter product. In order to obtain a reissue, B&L was forced to file affidavits regarding the scope of the ‘950 claims, specifically alleging that B&L had not claimed the full breadth of protection available to it. The ‘950 patent reissued as the ‘684 patent, over the reexamination arguments of HP. In light of B&L’s threats of infringement against HP, the declaratory judgment action was filed, where the District Court held that the new reissued claims were invalid.