AbCellera Biologics Inc. v. Berkeley Lights, Inc.

Background

This consolidated case includes three patent-infringement actions brought by AbCellera Biologics, Inc. and the University of British Columbia. The case had been stayed for approximately two years while inter partes review proceedings were pending. After lifting the stay on August 4, 2023, the Court set deadlines under the Patent Local Rules and scheduled a claim-construction hearing for July 15, 2024.

Under the schedule, AbCellera served amended disclosures concerning accused products and instrumentalities on November 2, 2023, and amended disclosures concerning asserted claims and infringement contentions on December 29, 2023. Bruker filed two motions to strike those amended disclosures. Magistrate Judge DeMarchi was scheduled to hear both motions on February 20, 2024.

Motion and Analysis

Bruker moved to enlarge the time for serving amended invalidity contentions. It asked that, if Judge DeMarchi granted its motion to strike, the amended invalidity contentions be due five weeks after any further amendment required from AbCellera; alternatively, if the motion to strike were denied, Bruker asked for a deadline five weeks after that ruling. Bruker also requested five-week extensions of later claim-construction deadlines and damages-contention deadlines as necessary.

The Court found the requested extension unpersuasive. Bruker’s request depended on a hypothetical future order that might not require AbCellera to amend its infringement contentions. The Court also found that any further amendment to AbCellera’s infringement theories would not necessarily affect Bruker’s ability to disclose its invalidity positions under the Patent Local Rules.

The Court further held that Bruker would not be prejudiced by serving its amended invalidity contentions by the existing February 2, 2024 deadline before the motions to strike were resolved. If AbCellera later had to amend its infringement contentions and those amendments affected Bruker’s invalidity contentions, Bruker could seek relief at that time. The Court likewise found no reason to extend the claim-construction and damages-contention deadlines based only on the possibility of further amendments.

Disposition

The Court denied Defendant Bruker Cellular Analysis, Inc.’s motion to enlarge time for invalidity contentions, claim construction, and damages contentions. The order did not change the existing schedule. The Court distinguished its earlier order in Finjan, Inc. v. Zscaler, Inc. because, in that case, the Court had already determined that the infringement contentions were deficient.