The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that
an accused infringer was entitled to a new trial relating to
validity issues but still faced sanctions for its continuous
disregard of its discovery obligations. ADASA Inc. v.
Avery Dennison Corp., Case No. 22-1092 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 16,
2022) (Moore, Hughes, Stark, JJ.)
ADASA owns a patent relating to methods and systems for
commissioning radio-frequency identification (RFID) transponders.
ADASA sued Avery Dennison for patent infringement, alleging that
its manufacture and sale of certain RFID tags infringed
ADASA's patent. Both parties sought summary judgment
following discovery. Avery Dennison asserted that the patent was
ineligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, and
ADASA argued that the asserted claims were not anticipated or
obvious based on the book RFID for Dummies. The
district court granted ADASA's motion on validity and denied
Avery Dennison's motion for patent ineligibility. Prior
