Digest of Homeland Housewares, LLC V. Sorensen Research and Development Trust, Nos. 2013-1345, -1383 (Fed. Cir. September 8, 2014) (non-precedential). On appeal from C.D. Cal. Before Lourie, Bryson, and Chen.
Procedural Posture: Patent holder Sorensen Research and Development Trust (“Sorensen”) appealed summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Homeland Housewares, LLC (“Homeland”). CAFC affirmed.
Infringement: The patent at issue recites a method for manufacturing thin wall plastic products by injection molding in which the risk of gaseous voids can be eliminated by increasing wall thickness at less than a threshold rate, where the inventors knew that a threshold rate exists but not how it was calculated. The alleged infringing products are plastic cups for Magic Bullet and Baby Bullet systems manufactured by Homeland. As the moving party that would not have the burden of proof at trial, Homeland was not required to produce affirmative evidence of noninfringement. Instead, Homeland needed only to point out to the district court the absence of evidence to support Sorenson’s case. The CAFC affirmed the district court’s granting of summary judgment on the grounds that there was no evidence supporting Sorenson’s contentions of infringement.