GlobeRanger Corporation v. Software AG
691 F.3d 702
| 5th Cir. | 2012Background
- GlobeRanger alleged an RFID system for commercial use and customized deployments for clients.
- Defendants include Software AG and subsidiaries; DoD RFID mandate in 2004 spurred contracts.
- Naniq Systems and Main Sail served as Navy contract subcontractors; allegations of insider access and misdeeds.
- GlobeRanger asserted five state-law claims; defendants removed to federal court, seeking preemption under the Copyright Act.
- District court denied remand and granted dismissal on preemption grounds; GlobeRanger appeals.
- Court addresses complete preemption doctrine and the potential for nonpreempted claims to proceed in federal court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Copyright Act provides complete preemption and federal jurisdiction | GlobeRanger argues no exclusive federal remedy; not all claims preempted | Defendants contend §301(a) completely preempts relevant claims | Yes; complete preemption applies and jurisdiction exists |
| Whether the claims fall within copyright subject matter | RFID system involves processes outside §102(b) | Nonliteral elements and system structure may be protected | Some allegations plausibly outside subject matter; not all claims preempted |
| Whether conversion claim is preempted as equivalent to copyright | Conversion relates to intangible property not within copyright | Conversion may be preempted as equivalent to copyright protection | Preemption plausible for conversion; case remanded for complete analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1987) (complete preemption framework; removal based on federal defense allowed only for exclusive federal claims)
- New Orleans & Gulf Coast Ry. Co. v. Barrois, 533 F.3d 321 (5th Cir. 2008) (tests for exclusive federal jurisdiction under complete preemption)
- Rosciszewski v. Arete Assocs., Inc., 1 F.3d 225 (4th Cir. 1993) (copyright preemption precludes state-law claims when §301(a) applies)
- Briarpatch Ltd., L.P. v. Phoenix Pictures, Inc., 373 F.3d 296 (2d Cir. 2004) (court adopts strong view of complete preemption under §301(a))
- Eng’g Dynamics, Inc. v. Structural Software, Inc., 26 F.3d 1335 (5th Cir. 1994) (nonliteral elements of computer programs may be copyrighted; limits scope of preemption)
- Kepner-Tregoe, Inc. v. Leadership Software, Inc., 12 F.3d 527 (5th Cir. 1994) (protectable expression in a program can survive modifications even if ideas are unprotectable)
- Alcatel USA, Inc. v. DGI Techs., Inc., 166 F.3d 772 (5th Cir. 1999) (artful pleading to bypass preemption rejected; focus on specific information vs. works)