April 2014

Spotlight Info

In Danisco US Inc. v. Novozymes A/S, No. 13-1214 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 11, 2014), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of a DJ action filed by Danisco US Inc. (“Danisco”) regarding U.S. Patent No. 8,252,573 (“the ’573 patent”).  Danisco had filed the DJ action on the date of issuance of the ’573 patent, and the district court dismissed the DJ action because the action was filed prior to the time the patentee took, or even could have taken, any affirmative action to enforce its patent rights.  The Federal Circuit reversed, holding that there existed at the time Danisco filed its DJ complaint a case of actual controversy, and that “Article III does not mandate that the declaratory judgment defendant have threatened litigation or otherwise taken action to enforce its rights before a justiciable controversy can arise . . . .”  Slip op. at 7-8.

See this month’s edition of Last Month at the Federal Circuit for a full summary of this decision.