Was Cisco v. Arista All Just a Bad Dream?
Cisco and Arista are seeking to vacate a judgment that was one of the first to apply copyright's “scenes-a-faire” defense in the software context.
September 07, 2018 at 05:26 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Update: On Monday, Sept. 10, the Federal Circuit granted Cisco's and Arista's request to send the case back to Judge Freeman.
Do you remember a couple of years ago when Cisco Systems and Arista Networks had that big copyright showdown in San Jose? Bob Van Nest of Keker, Van Nest & Peters faced off with David Nelson of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan. Cisco's John Chambers and Arista's Jayshree Ullal testified. Silicon Valley media watched it all closely.
OK, now pretend none of that ever happened. Especially the jury's verdict finding that Arista infringed, but that external factors other than Cisco's creativity dictated the selection, arrangement and organization of phrases in Cisco's command line interface.
That's what Cisco and Arista are now asking U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman and the Federal Circuit to do. It turns out that, as part of their $400 million settlement, the networking giants are seeking to vacate the judgment—one of the first to apply copyright's “scenes-a-faire” defense in the software context. On Wednesday, Freeman indicated she's willing to oblige.
The parties now have to persuade the Federal Circuit to send the case back to Freeman without issuing a ruling. The appellate court heard arguments in the case in June.
Quinn Emanuel partner Kathleen Sullivan and Keker partner Steven Hirsch emphasized in their joint request to the Federal Circuit that the settlement resolves multiple disputes across district courts, the International Trade Commission and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. “It is in the overall public interest for the court to support parties in negotiating and reaching settlement, including where vacatur is contemplated as part of a settlement, and especially where vacatur is part of a settlement that will resolve multiple pending disputes,” they wrote to the court.
Just to say it, this is a 100 percent about-face from the parties' initial public statement the day of the Aug. 6 settlement. “Arista and Cisco will continue to seek appellate court review of the scenes-a-faire verdict in the earlier trial regarding legal protection for user interfaces,” they said back then.
But seeking vacatur appears to have been the strategy all along. The parties' initial term sheet governing the deal, made public this week, states, “The Parties will jointly approach the District Court with legal grounds for vacatur to attempt to persuade the Court to vacate the judgment to facilitate a global settlement of all matters.'”
The Federal Circuit on Monday granted Cisco's and Arista's request to abort the appeal and send the case back to Freeman.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAttorney of the Year Finalist: Michael Rubin, Latham & Watkins
John Hueston Appointed Monitor by CA Court Judge in Ruling on Veterans' Housing Case
Ex-Federal Prosecutor and White-Collar Defense Lawyer Joins Foundation Law Group
Litigator Sarah Shekhter Joins San Diego Jewish Bar Association Board of Directors
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250