Dev., Inc. v. TCI Cablevision of Cal., Inc., 248 F.3d 1333, 1347-48 (Fed. Cir. 2001); see also Aspex Eyewear, Inc. v. Miracle Optics, Inc., 434 F.3d 1336, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (Just as "a patentee must be joined in any lawsuit involving his or her patent, there must be joinder of any exclusive licensee:" (citing Indep.
"[W]hether a transfer of a particular right or interest under a patent is an assignment or a license does not depend upon the name by which it calls itself, but upon the legal effect of its provisions:" Vaupel Textilmaschinen KG v. Meccanica Euro Italia S.P.A., 944 F.2d 870, 873 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
The Boeing Field of Use also includes: military or national security uses (or a simulation under the auspices ofa government); "marine, rail, and multi-modal transportation;" "solar energy technology;" and "information surveillance and reconnaissance."
Gamco, 504 F.3d at 1278.7 Therefore, since Boeing's absence would place on Defendants a "substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations," it would be a required party to this action.
7 AB insists that since AB '"will be a party to any suit that [Boeing] initiates, it will be collaterally estopped from re-litigating an issue that received a final judgment on the merits,' removing any risk of inconsistent litigation."