Facts

SKC Kolon PI Inc. and SKC Inc. (collectively, SKC) brought suit against Kaneka Corp. in retaliation to the patent lawsuit filed by Kenka against SKC.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
SKC sought declaratory judgments of invalidity and non-infringement of the same exact patents asserted in Kaneka's lawsuit. SKC also asserted intentional interference with economic relations and violations of the Lanham Act.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Kaneka claimed that SKC infringed on five of its patents relating to polymide film.

Result

The case was dismissed for improper service. Instead of duly serving Kaneka through service of process prescribed by the Hague Convention, SKC, relying on California state law, left its complaint with a process specialist at CT Corporations Systems Inc. (CT), which was an agent for Kaneka Texas Corp. (KTC) and Kaneka's wholly owned subsidiary. Judge Gary Allen Feess agreed with Kaneka and ruled that KTC cannot be considered Kaneka's "general manager in this state," because KTC's business activities were focused elsewhere even though KTC was the exclusive distributor of Kaneka products in the U.S.

Other Information

REFERRING JUDGE: Margaret A. Nagle.