FRCP 60(b) motion in Seirus v. Cabela's

Within Seirus v. Cabela's

Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. appeals from the district court's ruling, inter alia, that its patent is invalid as obvious and that the defendants do not infringe the other two patents at issue. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. states that the parties have settled the case, conditioned upon the district court's grant of a Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to vacate the underlying rulings and judgment
, and moves to remand so that the district court can consider such a motion.

We grant the motion to remand to the extent that we remand for the limited purpose of the district court's consideration of Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc.'s motion. Ohio Willow Wood Co. v. Thermo-Ply, Inc., 629 F.3d 1374, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2011). We retain jurisdiction so that any of the parties may seek appellate review by notifying the clerk of the court within thirty days of entry of the district court's decision on remand. The appeals are held in abeyance pending the resolution of the motion by the district court. The parties should promptly inform this court of the district court's ruling on the motion and should propose how they believe these appeals should proceed in light of the district court's ruling.