Nano-Proprietary, Inc. v. Canon Inc.

Nano-Proprietary, Inc. v. Canon Inc.

5th Cir. (2008)

Fitzpatrick Obtains Reversal Of District Court's Termination Of Patent License For Long Time Client Canon

Last year, a district court in Texas found that Fitzpatrick client Canon breached a patent license agreement it had entered into with plaintiff, and terminated Canon’s license under patents on nano-technology related to flat-panel television displays. A jury trial followed on plaintiff’s claim for damages, and Fitzpatrick obtained a verdict that no damages had been suffered.

Now, on appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ruled that “even assuming that Canon breached” (a decision it declined to affirm), the district court was incorrect in its decision to terminate, and reinstated Canon’s license. The Fifth Circuit also ruled that Canon’s subsidiary SED Inc., which it formed to develop and manufacture flat panels, is entitled to the benefit of the license. Finally, the Fifth Circuit affirmed all aspects of the district court’s decisions relevant to plaintiff’s cross-appeal, including the district court’s rulings at trial and dismissal of plaintiff’s tortious interference claim on the pleadings.

Fitzpatrick attorneys on the appeal and at trial include Nicholas M. Cannella, Michael P. Sandonato and Peter D. Shapiro.

View Attachment (PDF)