Unitherm Food Sys., Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc.

ConAgra (defendant), which had patented a process invented by Unitherm Food Systems (Unitherm) (plaintiff), was sued by Unitherm and a purchaser for patent and antitrust violations; at the close of evidence ConAgra unsuccessfully moved for a directed verdict, and after the jury found for Unitherm, ConAgra neither renewed its motion for judgment as a matter of law nor requested a new trial before appealing. The Federal Circuit found it could not review the evidence's sufficiency due to ConAgra's failure to file a postverdict motion, but nonetheless applied a rule (drawn from the Tenth Circuit) permitting review anyway since ConAgra had moved for judgment as a matter of law before the case reached the jury, ultimately vacating the verdict and ordering a new trial; Unitherm sought and received Supreme Court review.