Gunn v. Minton: The Supreme Court's Correction of the Federal Circuit's Overly Broad Assertion of Jurisdiction Over State-Law Claims

For nearly two decades, the Federal Circuit has applied a lenient standard for federal jurisdiction that routinely sweeps state law claims into the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts merely because the claims require resolution of patent-law issues. The latest casualties of the Federal Circuit's approach are state-law malpractice claims against patent attorneys. The Federal Circuit has held that such claims are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts if resolution of a patent-law issue is necessary to resolve the claim.

The Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in one such malpractice case, Gunn v. Minton, and held, in a unanimous decision, that the malpractice claim was not properly in federal court even though it raised an issue of patent law.

Originally published in New Matter - Volume 38, Number 1.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Topics:  Attorney Malpractice, Certiorari, Gunn v Minton, Jurisdiction, Patents, Personal Jurisdiction, SCOTUS

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, Intellectual Property Updates, Professional Malpractice Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »