Most summary judgment motions in patent cases are denied. That's one reason Judge Connolly issued a standing order earlier this year requiring that parties rank their summary judgment motions and explaining that in most cases he will not consider a party's summary judgment motion if he has previously denied a summary judgment motion by that party.
Judge Connolly noted that "the complexity, voluminous record, competing expert testimony, and scorched-earth lawyering in the typical patent case make it almost inevitable that a disputed material fact will preclude summary judgment." Nonetheless, he expressed hope "that an effectively managed summary judgment practice can bring about efficiencies and cost savings."
A few days ago, in Chromadex, Inc. v. Elysium Health, Inc., C.A. No. 18-1434-CFC, Judge Connolly granted defendant's motion for summary judgment of patent invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101, just weeks before trial.
The motion for summary judgment in question was filed on April 27, 2021. Judge Connolly issued his standing order requiring parties to rank summary judgment motions on April 30, three days later. A few days after the standing order issued, he issued an oral order in the Chromadex case ordering the parties to rank their SJ motions. In response, the defendant ranked its Section 101 order first.
In the subsequent four-and-a-half months, the parties completed their briefing and moved toward a scheduled September 27, 2021 jury trial.
Then on September 14, less than two weeks before trial, Judge Connolly held a teleconference with the parties during which he explained that he would be granting the Section 101 motion. He also cancelled the trial.
This ruling demonstrates that Judge Connolly continues to find value in the summary judgment process, and that parties should therefore carefully consider how to rank their motions in his cases.
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.
