543 F.Supp. 1026 (D.Mass. 1982), Civ. A. 81-1130, Northern Telecom Inc. v. Wang Laboratories, Inc.

• Date: 26 July 1982
• Citation: 543 F.Supp. 1026
• Docket Number: Civ. A. 81-1130
• Parties: Northern Telecom Inc. v. Wang Laboratories, Inc.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

Page 1026

543 F.Supp. 1026 (D.Mass. 1982)

NORTHERN TELECOM INC., Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendant,

v.

WANG LABORATORIES, INC., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff,

v.

NORTHERN TELECOM LIMITED, Third-Party Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 81-1130-G.

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.

July 26, 1982

Page 1027

John J. Curtin, Jr., Anne J. Kopelman, Bingham, Dana & Gould, Jerome P. Facher, Hale & Dorr, Boston, Mass., for Northern Telecom Inc.

Thomas J. Sartory, Boston, Mass., for Northern Telecom Inc. and Northern Telecom Ltd.

Hale & Dorr, Boston, Mass., and George W. Whitney, Brumbaugh, Graves, Donohue & Raymond, New York City, for Northern Telecom Ltd.

Martin Kirkpatrick, Fish & Richardson, Paul F. Ware, Jr., Goodwin, Procter & Hoar, Boston, Mass., for Wang Laboratories, Inc.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING NORTHERN TELECOM LIMITED'S MOTION TO DISMISS

GARRITY, District Judge.

Plaintiff Northern Telecom Inc. brought this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. s 1338(a) against Wang Laboratories, Inc., seeking injunctive and monetary relief for alleged infringement of U.S. Letters Patent 3,760,375. Wang denied NTI's essential allegations, and brought a counterclaim against NTI and its parent, Northern Telecom Limited (NTL), under 28 U.S.C. s 2201, seeking a declaration of title to the patent and a declaration that the patent is invalid, unenforceable and not infringed by Wang. NTL moved to dismiss the counterclaim as against it, or for summary judgment, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted against NTL and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. NTL's alternative motions present the only matters before the court for decision. Disposition of those motions essentially turns on whether NTL has title to the patent in question. The court allowed Wang a two-month period of discovery directed to that issue, and heard argument on the motions on June 10, 1982. Having done so, we now grant NTL's motions and order the action dismissed as against it.

The Declaratory Judgment Act, under which Wang brings its counterclaim, provides that "(i)n a case of actual controversy within its jurisdiction ... any court of the United States, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration .... 28 U.S.C. s 2201. The plain language of the statute makes clear that, as the First Circuit has found, "(a) declaratory judgment action is not justiciable if it does not present a case or controversy. " Sweetheart Plastics, Inc. v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc., 1 Cir. 1971, 439 F.2d 871, 873. The question this action presents, therefore, is whether Wang's counterclaim against NTL presents the requisite "case of actual controversy. " Resolution of that question depends on whether NTL owns the patent which is the subject of this proceeding.

NTL contends that it does not now, nor has it ever, held title to the patent. The patent in question was originally issued to Sycor, Inc. in 1973. Sycor subsequently merged with and into Data 100 Corporation on May 31, 1979, and the combined entity became Northern Telecom Systems Corp. (NTSC). Some 19 months later, NTSC merged with and into NTI. NTL contends that title to the patent, and all rights derived from that status, passed from Sycor to NTSC and finally to NTI.

Wang disagrees. It contends that NTL does own the patent. Establishing record title, upon which NTL relies, does not prove ownership, it insists. Moreover, Wang argues that a 1980 R & D Agreement vests ownership in NTL. Wang further contends that NTL has acted in the past as if it did own the patent-by submitting a Draft License Agreement to Wang and others and by threatening suit for...