Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 25, 2023

AbCellera Biologics Inc. v. Berkeley Lights, Inc.

Judge
Jon Tigar
Docket
4:20-cv-08624
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In AbCellera Biologics v. Berkeley Lights, Judge Tigar kept a motion hearing scheduled because an amended complaint did not moot pending counterclaims.

Who this affects

The order affected AbCellera Biologics Inc.’s pending motion and Bruker Cellular Analysis’s second amended counterclaims; it did not decide the motion’s merits.

What happened

In AbCellera Biologics Inc. v. Berkeley Lights, Inc., AbCellera filed a motion asking the court to dismiss and strike certain defenses and counterclaims in Berkeley Lights’ answer and second amended counterclaims. The court had previously paused the motion while related patent review proceedings were pending, then lifted the pause on August 4, 2023.

AbCellera filed an amended complaint on October 20, 2023. The court explained that this did not make the counterclaims moot, so the counterclaims remained operative and AbCellera’s motion remained pending.

The court did not decide the motion. Judge Tigar ordered that the hearing scheduled for November 2, 2023, would remain on the calendar.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
AbCellera Biologics Inc. v. Berkeley Lights, Inc. · No. 4:20-cv-08624
Judge
Jon Tigar
Date
Oct. 25, 2023

Background

The opinion concerns AbCellera’s motion to dismiss and strike certain affirmative defenses and counterclaims from the defendant’s answer and second amended counterclaims. The caption identifies the defendant as Bruker Cellular Analysis, formerly known as Berkeley Lights, Inc. The motion was filed on August 5, 2021, and was fully briefed by September 19, 2023.

The court had stayed the motion pending inter partes review, a patent-review process, and lifted that stay on August 4, 2023. The motion was scheduled for a hearing on November 2, 2023.

Amended Complaint and Counterclaims

AbCellera filed an amended complaint on October 20, 2023, within the deadline in the court’s scheduling order. The court stated that filing an amended complaint did not make the counterclaims filed with the original complaint moot. The defendant’s second amended counterclaims therefore remained operative, and AbCellera’s motion to dismiss remained pending.

Disposition

The court did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss and strike. Instead, it ordered that the November 2, 2023, motion hearing would remain on the calendar.

Judge

The order was signed by Jon S. Tigar, United States District Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.