Inappropriate Dismissal Of Counterclaims Is Harmless Error Absent Prejudice In Having To Reassert Such Counterclaims In A Subsequent Action
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.05.07
The Federal Circuit in Walter Kidde Portable Equipment, Inc. v. Universal Security Instruments, Inc., (No. 06-1420, March 2, 2007) finds that the district erred as a matter of law when it dismissed the defendant’s counterclaims over objection from the defendant, while granting the plaintiff’s motion for voluntary dismissal. The plaintiff had filed a motion for voluntary dismissal in order to re-file its complaint after curing a standing defect raised by the defendant. Part of this standing defect also related to what law should govern the document purporting to transfer ownership in the asserted patent to the plaintiff, thereby also raising a subject matter jurisdiction issue for the district court. Rather than addressing the subject matter jurisdiction issue, however, the district court not only granted the plaintiff’s motion to voluntarily dismiss without prejudice, but went a step further by also dismissing the defendant’s counterclaims. The plaintiff re-filed its complaint on the same day as its motion for voluntary dismissal was granted.
The Federal Circuit finds that it was error for the district court to not first consider the subject matter jurisdiction issue since at least some of the counterclaims were unrelated to the plaintiff’s standing defect. That fact notwithstanding, the Federal Circuit further finds that this error was harmless since the defendant was free to reassert all counterclaims in the subsequently-filed action, and there was no evidence that the defendant was prejudiced by having to do so.
Insights
Client Alert | 14 min read | 03.13.26
AI for Government: 7 Days for Contractor Comments on GSA Proposed Contract Clause for AI Systems
On March 6, 2026, the General Services Administration (GSA) issued a significant proposed contract clause, GSAR 552.239-7001, Basic Safeguarding of Artificial Intelligence Systems (“Clause”), for inclusion in GSA Schedule solicitations and contracts for AI capabilities. The proposed clause would impose substantial new requirements related to AI sources, intellectual property rights, data use, change management, and performance standards. The Clause would also take precedence over any other contract terms (including commercial licensing terms) related to AI, including a Seller’s terms of sale and service to which the Government had previously agreed. GSA requests comments by March 20, 2026.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.12.26
DOJ Releases First-Ever Department-Wide Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.12.26
