This week, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in a set of related cases between Arthrex and Smith & Nephew, as well as the federal government. The cases revolve around one fundamental question: are judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) principal officers of the United States? That question controls the constitutionality of their…
Tag Archive for Supreme Court
Covered Business Method Review and Thryv
by Josh Landau •
On Monday, the Supreme Court granted, vacated, and remanded (GVRed) the Federal Circuit’s decision in Emerson Electric v. SIPCO in light of this year’s Thryv decision. Emerson was challenging the Federal Circuit’s overturning of the USPTO’s determination that the SIPCO patent was eligible for review under the covered business method (CBM) program. With the Court’s…
In Thryv, Supreme Court Clarifies Bar On Review of Institution Decisions
by Josh Landau •
In today’s decision in Thryv v. Click-To-Call, the Supreme Court held that the AIA means what it says—decisions to institute an inter partes review “shall be final and nonappealable.”
PTAB Will Continue To Double-Check Its Work—All Of It
by Josh Landau •
Today, the Supreme Court issued two opinions in cases focused on the inter partes review (IPR) procedure. First, in Oil States v. Greene’s Energy Group, the Court upheld the constitutionality of IPR by a 7-2 vote. Second, in a more narrowly divided 5-4 decision in SAS v. Matal, the Court decided that the PTAB’s practice…
SCOTUS Will Decide Whether Foreign Infringement Can Create Lost Profits
by Josh Landau •
Last Friday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in WesternGeco v. ION Geophysical. Essentially, the case asks whether, when components for a patented process or machine are manufactured in the U.S. and combined or used abroad, the profits lost due to the foreign activities can be considered lost profits and awarded as damages under U.S. patent…
A Big Day For The PTO—And A Good Day
by Josh Landau •
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in two separate cases regarding inter partes review (IPR)—Oil States v. Greene’s Energy and SAS Institute v. Matal. In both Oil States and SAS, the Court appears to be sympathetic to the Patent Office’s arguments—and that’s good for everyone. Oil States The Oil States case focuses on whether…
The Special Nature Of Venue In Patent Law
by Josh Landau •
TC Heartland continues to impact the world of patent litigation. I haven’t run the numbers yet on what’s happened since the decision came down, but just having read through the list of cases filed, the Eastern District of Texas certainly has seen a reduction in cases filed. Tomorrow morning, the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on…
Guest Post: How TC Heartland May Affect District Court Filings: A Quantitative Assessment
by Unified Patents •
This guest post was authored by Shawn Ambwani and Robert Jain. Shawn Ambwani is the COO and co-founder of Unified Patents. Robert Jain is an attorney at Unified Patents. This post provides a quantitative prediction of how TC Heartland may impact where patent litigation is filed, a topic I recently wrote about. Summary TC Heartland…
TC Heartland Attacks The Heart Of Patent Forum Shopping
by Josh Landau •
The Supreme Court decided TC Heartland v. Kraft on Monday. The decision addresses a procedural point with huge effects on patent litigation. The Problem The basic problem before this case was that it was very easy to pick the court you wanted to sue someone in; it’s called “forum shopping.” And (if you’re a…
SCOTUS Taking Case On Partial Institution Of IPRs
by Josh Landau •
One of the biggest changes coming out of the 2011 America Invents Act (AIA) was the creation of the inter partes review (IPR) procedure, which allows people to challenge the validity of patents after they’ve issued. Today, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether an IPR can be “instituted” on only some of the…