Everymd v. Santorum

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit EVERYMD, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. RICK SANTORUM, MITT ROMNEY, AND NEWT GINGRICH, Defendants-Appellees, AND GOLDMAN, SACHS, & CO. AND JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Defendants-Appellees, AND YAHOO, INC., AOL, INC., MICROSOFT, INC., AND GOOGLE, INC., Defendants-Appellees, 2012-1491 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in case no. 12-CV-1623, Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzer. EVERYMD v. RICK sANToRUM 2 0 R D E R The court considers whether this appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. EveryMD appears to be appealing from an order of the United States District Court for the Central District of California staying proceedings in this patent infringe» ment action pending inter partes reexamination of the patent-in-suit. Ordinarily, only a final decision of a districtcourt may be appealed, i.e., one that "ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment." Cotlin u. United Stotes, 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945); see 28 U.S.C. §§ 129l, 1295(a); see also Spread Spectrum Screening LLC v. Eostman Kodok Co., 657 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (stay of patent infringement suit pending reexamination proceedings not a final judgment and not appealable); Gou£d v. Control Laser Gorp., 705 F.2d 1340, 1341-42 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (because a stay pending reexamination normally does not foreclose review on the merits by a federal court such orders are only appealable if the stay "effectively disposes of the district court action."). Based only on our review, it appears that the district court’s stay order may not be appealable at this time. Accordingly, IT Is ORDERED THAT: (1) The parties are directed to respond within 21 days from the date of filing of this order concerning whether this petition should be dismissed. (2) The briefing schedule is stayed. 3 EVERYMD V. RICK SANTORUM FoR THE CoUR'r AU@ 08 mm /S/ Jan Horbaly Date J an Horbaly Clerk cc: Frank Michael Weyer, Esq. |LED John N. Zarian, Esq U.S.BDU OF APPEALS_|!_=UH Edward Daniel Robinson, Esq. THEFEDERAL C;Rcm Stefani E. Shanberg, Esq. iAl_lG [j 8 '[_1]‘\‘¢ s26 JAN HUHBA|.Y CLERK