Luxer Corporation v. Package Concierge, Inc.
1:24-cv-00603
| D. Del. | Jun 30, 2025Background
- Luxer Corporation sued Package Concierge, Inc. for patent infringement over U.S. Patent No. 11,625,675 in the District of Delaware.
- Defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing the ’675 Patent was ineligible for protection; the Court granted the motion and dismissed the case on February 6, 2025.
- Before dismissal, on February 4, 2025, the parties notified the Court they had reached a “settlement in principle” but mentioned further details were yet to be finalized.
- No stipulation of dismissal was filed before the Court issued its dismissal order.
- Luxer appealed the dismissal and, during the appeal, sought an indicative ruling from the district court asking it to enforce the purported settlement, vacate its prior order if remanded, and award attorneys’ fees.
- The CAFC stayed the appeal for the district court to consider Luxer’s motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a binding and enforceable settlement was reached before the Court's dismissal. | Parties had agreed to all essential terms of settlement, including payment, dismissal, and license, as of Feb 4, 2025. | Essential terms, such as payment method and license scope, were unresolved; further negotiations were ongoing. | No enforceable settlement existed; not all essential terms were finalized before dismissal. |
| Whether the Court had jurisdiction to dismiss the case after being notified of settlement. | Notification of settlement stripped Court of jurisdiction to dismiss. | Only notification of settlement "in principle" was given; no binding agreement or Rule 41 stipulation of dismissal was filed. | Court retained jurisdiction and acted appropriately under Rule 41; dismissal was proper. |
| Whether Plaintiff is entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs for pursuing its motion. | Sought fees for work related to the motion. | Contested legitimacy of settlement agreement in good faith; fees not warranted. | Fees denied; no bad faith or improper conduct by Defendant. |
Key Cases Cited
- Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56 (courts are divested of jurisdiction upon appeal unless exception applies)
- Read v. Baker, 438 F. Supp. 732 (settlement agreements voluntarily entered are binding, even if unwritten)
- Hobbs v. American Investors Mgt., Inc., 576 F.2d 29 (fees awarded only in extraordinary circumstances, e.g., for bad faith)