`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`
`Alexandria Division
`
`RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, etal
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`CIVIL ACTION I:20cv393
`
`ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES, LLC, etal
`
`Defendant.
`
`ORDER
`
`Before the Court are RAI's Motion to Dismiss with prejudice its counterclaims and
`
`certain affirmative defenses pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41 and 41(A)(2) and (15)(a)(2), and PMP's
`
`Motion for Summary Judgment on the same counterclaims and certain affirmative defenses.
`
`The Comt has reviewed the pleadings and considered the argument of the parties and
`
`grants RAI's Motion to Dismiss the following counterclaims and defenses as listed below with
`
`prejudice as requested. The Court denies PMP's Motion for Summary Judgment.
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`A counterclaim and affirmative defense that U.S. Patent No. 6,803,545
`("the '545 Patent") is unenforceable for inequitable conduct before the
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. See Pis.' Am. Answer & Coimterclaim
`to Defs. Altria Client Servs. LLC & Philip Morris USA, Inc.'s Am.
`Counterclaims, Doc 274 at 19-26 (Oct. 30,2020).
`
`The equitable defenses of estoppel, acquiescence, waiver, and unclean
`hands as to allegations that Plaintiffs infringed U.S. Patent No. 10,104,911
`("the '911 Patent") and U.S. Patent No. 10,555,556 ("the '556 Patent").
`See Pis.' Answer to Def. Philip Morris Products S.A.'s Second Am.
`Counterclaims, Doc 523 at 18 (Mar. 26,2021).
`
`3.
`
`The equitable defenses of estoppel, waiver, and acquiescence as to
`allegations that Plaintiffs infringed U. S. Patent No. 10,420,374 ("the '374
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 804 Filed 08/06/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID# 21203
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 804 Filed 08/06/21 Page 2 of 2 Page|D# 21203
`
`Patent”) and U. S. Patent No. 9,814,265 (“the ‘265 Patent”). See Doc. 2'74
`
`at 19; Dkt. 523 at 18.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`2.
`
`The equitable defense of unclean hands as to allegations that Plaintiffs
`infringed U.S. Patent No. 6,803,545 (“the ‘545 Patent”). Doc. 224 at 19.
`
`The defense that damages are statutorily limited by a failure to satisfy the
`requirements 0f35 U.S.C. § § 286 and 287 as to the infringement
`allegations for the ‘91 l, ‘556, and “265 Patents. See Doc 523 at 18.
`
`The defense that the allegations ofinfringement as to the “911, ‘556, and
`‘265 Patents are barred to the extent they are founded on activities
`occurring outside the territorial reach of U. S. patent laws.
`
`The defense that the allegations of infringement as to the “545 and E374
`Patents are barer to the extent they are founded on activities occurring
`outside the territorial reach ofU. S. patent laws. Doc. 274 at 20.
`
`RAI shall file the proposed amended answer to PMP’s counterclaims withdrawing the
`
`defenses and its proposed amended response to Altria’s and PM USA’s counterciaims and
`
`%L
`
`iam O’Grady
`United States District Judge
`
`certain defenses.
`
`Alexandria, Virginia
`August L2
`, 2021
`
`