Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Xitronix Corporation v. KLA-Tencor Corporation, dba KLA-Tencor, Incorporated

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 18-50114 · judgment February 15, 2019

Certiorari denied · October 7, 2019
Pre-decision estimate: 47% cert probability (95% interval 34%–61%)

Before the decision, about 11.5× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a petition filed soon after the judgment below, a Fifth Circuit decision below, and counsel with five or more prior petitions here, and down for a business respondent.

Question presented

In Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp., 382 U.S. 172 (1965), this Court held that “the enforcement of a patent procured by fraud on the Patent Office may be violative of § 2 of the Sherman Act provided the other elements necessary to a § 2 case are present.” Id. at 174. Petitioner filed a Walker Process suit against Respondent, alleging that Respondent violated the antitrust laws by fraudulently obtaining a patent. After the District Court granted summary judgment to Respondent, Petitioner appealed. The Federal Circuit ruled that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal, and transferred it to the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit then ruled that the Federal Circuit had exclusive jurisdiction over the appeal, and transferred it back to the Federal Circuit. The question presented is: Does appellate jurisdiction over Walker Process claims lie in the regional circuits, or in the Federal Circuit?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Adam G. Unikowsky
Jenner & Block LLP

For respondent
Aaron Gabriel Fountain
DLA Piper LLP (US)

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences

Proceedings

  1. Oct 07 2019
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Sep 11 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
  3. Jul 30 2019
    Rescheduled.
  4. Jul 10 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
  5. Jul 10 2019
    Reply of petitioner Xitronix Corporation filed. (Distributed)
  6. Jun 24 2019
    Brief of respondent KLA-Tencor Corporation, DBA KLA-Tencor, Inc. in opposition filed.
  7. May 24 2019
    Response Requested. (Due June 24, 2019)
  8. May 23 2019
    Letter of petitioner dated May 23, 2019, received.
  9. May 14 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2019.
  10. May 10 2019
    Letter of petitioner dated May 10, 2019, received.
  11. Mar 21 2019
    Supplemental brief of petitioner Xitronix Corporation filed.
  12. Mar 20 2019
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 8, 2019.
  13. Mar 18 2019
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 8, 2019 to May 8, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
  14. Mar 08 2019
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 8, 2019)