The Federal Circuit decided two cases today; one involving a challenge to the Department of Commerce's determination involving frozen warmwater shrimp from Thailand, and a plaintiff's legal malpractice suit against her former attorney related to her patent applications.
In Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. US, No. 09-1375, the US Court of International Trade affirmed the Commerce's determination that, under the first step of Chevron, the multinational corporation provision, 19 U.S.C. section 1677b(d) does not apply in the situation when the non-exporting country is a nonmarket economy and normal value is based on a factors-of-production methodology under section 1677b(c). Under step two of Chevron, Commerce's interpretation of the MNC provision is reasonable.
In Davis v. Brouse McDowell, LPA, No. 09-1395, the court faced a challenge to the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff's former attorney on her legal malpractice claim. In affirming the decision, the court held that the district court exercised proper jurisdiction over plaintiff's malpractice cause of action, as the case-within-a-case doctrine applies to the claim. Thus, the court held that the district court did not err in striking certain portions of plaintiff's patent law expert's affidavit and correctly concluded that plaintiff failed to introduce sufficient evidence to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to the patentability of her inventions.