Broadcom Corp. v. Sarnoff Corp.

MEMORANDUM

Broadcom Corporation’s appeal from the order granting Sarnoff Corporation’s motion for summary judgment is based on the ground that Broadcom’s claims are precluded under New Jersey’s “entire controversy doctrine.” We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

The entire controversy doctrine, codified in Rule 4:30A of the Rules Governing the Court of the State of New Jersey, states that “[n]on-joinder of claims required to be joined by the entire controversy doctrine shall result in the preclusion of the omitted claims to the extent required by the entire controversy doctrine [except as otherwise provided in non-relevant circumstances].” 2 *785 The New Jersey Supreme Court has made clear that the doctrine will be strictly applied, and that it mandates joinder not only of claims but also defenses, and “not only defenses but [also] affirmative claims that could, and should, be brought as counterclaims.” Cogdell by Cogdell v. Hospital Center at Orange, 116 N.J. 7 , 560 A.2d 1169, 1173 (1989).

The district court found that Broad-com’s California claims were precluded because they arose from the same transaction as the New Jersey case. According to the district court,…