Digest of AntiCancer, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc., No. 2013-1056 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 20, 2014) (precedential). On appeal from S.D. Cal. Before Newman, Reyna, and Taranto.

Procedural Posture: Plaintiff-appellant AntiCancer appealed the district court’s summary judgment of noninfringement for failure to comply with a fee-shifting condition. The Federal Circuit vacated the condition and the summary judgment, and remanded.

  • Sanctions: The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment of no infringement based on AntiCancer’s allegedly deficient infringement contentions. The district court found that the contentions were deficient, and would allow plaintiff to file amended infringement contentions only if it concurrently paid the defendants’ attorney fees and costs related to the summary judgment motion. Because the fee shifting condition was a type of sanction, and because in filing its preliminary infringement contentions AntiCancer lacked the bad faith that would be required to sustain a fees sanction, the district court abused its discretion in granting summary judgment.