Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Astornet Techs., Inc. v. Bae Sys., Inc.

Astornet Techs., Inc. v. Bae Sys., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

September 17, 2015, Decided

2014-1854, 2015-1006, 2015-1007

Opinion

 [*1273]  [***1524]  Taranto, Circuit Judge.

Astornet Technologies, Inc. alleges that it is the sole exclusive licensee and owner of all rights in United States Patent No. 7,639,844, issued in December 2009 to Michael [**2]  Haddad as the inventor and entitled "Airport vehicular gate entry access system." In what ended up as three separate actions, Astornet asserted the patent against three corporations—NCR Government Systems, LLC; MorphoTrust USA, LLC; and BAE Systems, Inc. Astornet alleged that (a) NCR, MorphoTrust, and a subsidiary of BAE Systems, Inc. had contracts with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), an agency of the United States government, to supply TSA certain boarding-pass scanning systems, (b) TSA's use of the equipment infringed and would infringe the patent, and (c) NCR and MorphoTrust were bidding for another contract to supply modified equipment whose use by TSA would also infringe.

The district court dismissed the actions, relying on several grounds, among them that Astornet's exclusive remedy for the alleged infringement was a suit against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1498. While rejecting the district court's rationale for dismissal on other grounds, we agree that § 1498 bars these actions. We therefore affirm the dismissal.

Background

Because these consolidated cases come to us on appeals from dismissals under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), we rely on the facts as alleged in the operative [**3]  complaints and attachments (there being no material supplemental facts of public record subject to  [*1274]  judicial notice). See E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Kolon Indus., Inc., 637 F.3d 435, 448-49 (4th Cir. 2011); Philips v. Pitt County Memorial Hosp., 572 F.3d 176, 180 (4th Cir. 2009).

In June 2009, TSA sought bids for equipment it would use for scanning airline passengers' boarding passes at airports in a Credential Authentication Technology-Boarding Pass Scanning System (CAT/BPSS), requiring that bidders set up demonstration kiosks for TSA's review. Astornet bid but was unsuccessful, at least partly because it did not provide the required demonstration kiosk. In September 2011, TSA entered into contracts with NCR, a company for which MorphoTrust eventually took over as the supplier under the contract,  [***1525]  and a corporation called BAE Systems Information Solutions Inc., which is a subsidiary of a subsidiary of BAE Systems, Inc. (according to appellees' undisputed representation to this court citing BAE Systems, Inc.'s website).

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

802 F.3d 1271 *; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16535 **; 116 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1523 ***

ASTORNET TECHNOLOGIES INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. BAE SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee, MORPHOTRUST USA, LLC, Defendant-Appellee, NCR GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendant-Appellee

Subsequent History: As Corrected September 18, 2015.

Costs and fees proceeding at, Sanctions allowed by, in part, Sanctions disallowed by, As moot, in part Astornet Techs. v. Bae Sys., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102260 (D. Md., Aug. 4, 2016)

Prior History:  [**1] Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in Nos. 8:14-cv-00245-RWT, 8:14-cv-00543-RWT, 8:14-cv-00547-RWT, Senior Judge Roger W. Titus.

Astornet Techs., Inc. v. BAE Sys., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185143 (D. Md., Aug. 28, 2014)

Disposition: AFFIRMED.

CORE TERMS

infringement, district court, inducement, indirect, patent, subsidiary, voluntary dismissal, complaints, cases, allegations, amended complaint, contracts, manufacture, merits, notice, invention, contractors, piercing, terms, bids

Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Business & Corporate Compliance, Patent Law, Infringement Actions, Corporate & Government Infringers, Governments, Courts, Courts of Claims, Federal Government, Claims By & Against, Infringing Acts, Indirect Infringement, Business & Corporate Law, Shareholder Duties & Liabilities, Piercing the Corporate Veil, General Overview, Judgments, Preclusion of Judgments, Res Judicata, Voluntary Dismissals, Notice of Dismissal, Dismissal, Stipulations, Dismissal Without Prejudice, Two Dismissal Rule, Parties