United States Fifth Circuit

In a suit arising from defendant's alleged violation of a patent license agreement (PLA) via an impermissible sublicense, dismissal of certain claims, partial summary judgment for plaintiff, and denial of damages are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) defendant did not breach the PLA, and plaintiff was not entitled in any case to terminate it; 2) there was no claim for tortious interference with prospective business relations where plaintiff presented no evidence of a reasonable probability of either an impending business or contractual relationship; and 3) evidence relating to damages was properly excluded and plaintiffs were not entitled to damages.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/25/2008
• Published 07/25/2008

Judges

• BENAVIDES, Circuit Judge:, Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fifth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Thomas E. Gilbertsen (argued), Basil C. Culyba, Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, Washington, DC, Thomas Hart Watkins, Albert A. Carrion, Jr., Brown McCarroll, Austin, TX, Jerrold Joseph Ganzfried, Howrey LLP, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant., Nicholas Michael Cannella (argued), Michael P. Sandonato, Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto, New York City, Patton G. Lochridge, Richard D. Milvenan, McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore, Austin, TX, Jeffrey Scott Levinger, Hankinson Levinger LLP, Dallas, TX, for Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees.