Taylor Brands, LLC v. GB II CORP., 627 F.3d 874

Taylor Brands sued CRKT in the Eastern District of Tennessee for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,651,344 related to assisted opening knives.
CRKT counterclaimed for declaratory judgments of non-infringement and invalidity; the case proceeded before a U.S. Magistrate Judge with discovery pending.
Prior to discovery, CRKT moved for partial summary judgment of non-infringement as to twenty-two specific CRKT knife models, described as dispositive of the case in practice.
In December 2009 the district court granted partial summary judgment of non-infringement for those twenty-two models; later, the parties withdrew their motions to amend and CRKT dismissed its invalidity counterclaim without prejudice.
The district court entered a Stipulated Final Judgment reflecting the partial grant of summary judgment and dismissal of the infringement claim as to the twenty-two models.
Taylor filed a first appeal on December 29, 2009 challenging the summary-judgment grant; CRKT moved to dismiss claiming waiver of appeal rights; a second appeal was filed March 26, 2010 seeking review of the attorney-fees order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Taylor waived its right to appeal by consenting to a final judgment without reservation.	Taylor did not waive by form-only consent; no settlement or dismissal of claims occurred.	Taylor consented to the final judgment without reserving appellate rights, implying waiver of appeal.	Waiver not presumed; first appeal allowed to proceed.
Whether Taylor has standing to appeal the attorney-fees order, and whether the second appeal is duplicative.	Taylor contested the fee order and sought review of the final judgment's ancillary issues.	Taylor was not aggrieved by the fee order and thus lacks standing; second appeal duplicative of the final-judgment appeal.	Second appeal dismissed for lack of standing and duplicative appeal.

Thomsen v. Cayser, 243 U.S. 66 (U.S. 1917) (consent to form of judgment does not bar appeal)
United States v. Procter & Gamble, 356 U.S. 677 (U.S. 1958) (appeal permitted where final judgment on merits contemplated)
ACORN v. Edgar, 99 F.3d 261 (7th Cir. 1996) (consent decree and class-action compliance plans; waiver analysis)
LaForest v. Honeywell Int'l Inc., 569 F.3d 69 (2d Cir. 2009) (distinguishing consent to form from consent to substance)
Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. United States, 113 U.S. 261 (U.S. 1885) (consent to settlement does not necessarily waive appeal)
Slaven v. American Trading Transp. Co., Inc., 146 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 1998) (consent to form of judgment; waiver considerations)
Mock v. T.G. & Y. Stores Co., 971 F.2d 522 (10th Cir. 1992) (consent to settlement and dismissal without reservation)