Hydranautics

Hydranautics v. Filmtec Corporation

Good Law
70 F.3d 533·95 Daily Journal DAR 15150·1995 WL 675833·33 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 44·36 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1773
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 199593-56426California3,046 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

We must decide whether an antitrust claim is a compulsory counterclaim in a prior patent infringement suit. We conclude that it is not, and reverse the district court’s dismissal of the complaint.

I. Facts.

Under the Saline Water Conversion Act of 1971, the government was to contract for water desalinization research. Title to any inventions resulting from the research was to vest in the United States, and any patents were to be issued to the United States, in order to make discoveries available to the general public. FilmTec v. Hydranautics, 982 F.2d 1546, 1547-48 (Fed.Cir.1992). The government would pay scientists to do research, and the benefits were to go to the general public, not just to the researchers.

A scientist named John Cadotte was employed by a non-profit institution to perform desalinization research under a research contract with the government made pursuant to the Saline Water Conversion Act. Id. at 1548 . While so employed, he conceived of three new types of membranes for reverse osmosis desalinization. Id. at 1548-49 . The nonprofit research institution did not report Mr. Cadotte’s findings to the government. Id. Mr. Cadotte and others at the nonprofit formed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.