United States Federal Circuit

In a legal malpractice case between non-diverse parties based on alleged errors by counsel in patent prosecution and patent litigation, denial of defendants' motion to remand the suit is affirmed as the patent infringement question was a necessary element of plaintiff's malpractice claim and raised a substantial, contested question of patent law that Congress intended for resolution in federal court.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/15/2007
• Published 10/15/2007

Judges

• MICHEL, Chief Judge., Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, LOURIE and RADER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Paul V. Storm, Storm LLP, of Dallas, TX, argued for plaintiffs-appellees.   With him on the brief were Robin L. Barnes and Chris J. Kling.   Of counsel was John W. MacPete.   Of counsel on the brief were Harrie Samaras, RatnerPrestia P.C., of Valley Forge, PA;  Bernard Wm. Fischman, The Ariel House, of San Antonio, TX;  and Richard Tinsman, Tinsman & Sciano, Inc., of San Antonio, TX., E. Joshua Rosenkranz, Heller Ehrman LLP, of New York, NY, argued for defendants-appellants.   With him on the brief was Randy J. Kozel.