SEED RESEARCH EQUIPMENT v. GARY W. CLEM, INC. , No. 13-1310 (Fed. Cir. 2013)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 13-1310 Document: 31 Page: 1 Filed: 10/03/2013 NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit __________________________ SEED RESEARCH EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GARY W. CLEM, INC. (doing business as ALMACO), Defendant-Appellant. __________________________ 2013-1310 __________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Kansas in No. 09-CV-1282, Judge Eric F. Melgren. __________________________ ON MOTION __________________________ Before DYK, MOORE, and TARANTO, Circuit Judges. DYK, Circuit Judge. ORDER The parties jointly move to remand this case to the United States District Court for the District of Kansas due to settlement. Case: 13-1310 Document: 31 Page: 2 Filed: 10/03/2013 SEED RESEARCH EQUIPMENT v. GARY W. CLEM, INC. 2 Gary W. Clem, Inc. appeals from the district court s grant of summary judgment that the patent was invalid. The parties have stated that they have now settled the case and requested an indicative ruling from the district court, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1, whether the district court would defer, deny, or grant a motion to vacate the underlying judgment if the case were remanded. The district court indicated pursuant to Rule 62.1(a)(3) that it would grant the motion. We grant the motion to the extent that we remand for the limited purpose of the district court s consideration of the parties motions. See Ohio Willow Wood Co. v. Thermo-Ply, Inc., 629 F.3d 1374, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2011). In granting this motion, this court takes no position on the propriety or necessity of vacatur, leaving it to the district court to apply the principles enunciated in U.S. Bancorp Mortg. Co. v. Bonner Mall P ship, 513 U.S. 18, 29 (1994). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion is granted. The case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT /s/ Daniel E. O Toole Daniel E. O Toole Clerk s26 ISSUED AS A MANDATE: October 3, 2013

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.