From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
Sundance, Inc. v. DeMonte Fabricating, Ltd.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
550 F.3d 1356, 89 U.S.P.Q.2d 1535 (2008)
Sundance, Inc., and Merlot Tarpaulin and Sidekit Manufacturing Co., Inc. (collectively, Sundance) (plaintiffs) filed a patent-infringement lawsuit in federal court against DeMonte Fabricating Ltd. and Quick Draw Tarpaulin Systems, Inc. (collectively, DeMonte) (defendants). The lawsuit alleged that DeMonte infringed on Claim 1 of United States Patent No. 5,026,109 (the 109 patent). Prior to trial, DeMonte provided Sundance and the district court with the report of its patent-law expert, patent lawyer Charles Bliss. Bliss’s report listed the issues about which he intended to testify as an expert. Sundance filed a motion in limine seeking to prohibit Bliss from testifying as an expert at trial because he lacked the necessary qualifications or background. In response, DeMonte argued that Bliss’s extensive experience as a patent lawyer qualified Bliss as an expert but did not argue that Bliss had any specialized knowledge of the pertinent art. The district court denied the motion in limine and permitted Bliss to testify at trial. Bliss testified in detail about technical matters and offered legal opinions to the jury about the claims of noninfringement and invalidity. Bliss asserted that a person of ordinary skill would likely combine prior art, a conclusion that supported DeMonte’s argument that Claim 1 of the 109 patent was invalid for obviousness. The jury found that although DeMonte had infringed Claim 1 of the 109 patent, the claim was invalid for obviousness. Sundance appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Moore, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.