The Justice Insiders Podcast: SEC Plays Chicken with Jarkesy
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
There is a potential for a U.S. federal government shutdown on October 1, 2023, in view of the ongoing discussions in Congress regarding funding for Federal Fiscal Year 2024 (FFY24). The longest government shutdown was under...more
CIPO has recently announced that most of its official fees will increase by at least 25% in 2024. These adjustments will affect all pending applications for patents, trademarks, industrial designs and copyrights, as well as...more
As we wrote in this recent blog, whistleblowers from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) have called for the closure of WIPO’s Russia office in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. They’re concerned...more
An administrative agency lacks jurisdiction to decide a constitutional challenge that asks it to act contrary to its statutory provisions. See, e.g., Riggin v. Off. of Senate Fair Emp. Pracs., 61 F.3d 1563, 1565 (Fed. Cir....more
What comes to mind when you think of “hot topics” in patent law? Subject matter eligibility? Obviousness? Damages? Quietly, administrative law has moved to the top of the list of issues that consume the attention of the Court...more
After the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 139 S. Ct. 1853 (2019), held that federal agencies are not “persons” eligible to challenge a patent at the PTAB, the government was...more
James Kisor, a Korean War Veteran, asked the Supreme Court to overrule a longstanding presumption that courts defer to an executive agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own regulation, a principle known as Auer...more
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court held that government entities could not be considered “persons” entitled to challenge patents owned by others before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)....more
A divided Supreme Court changed the landscape of administrative law in a recent decision, Kisor v. Wilkie. In Kisor, a slim majority declined to overrule Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., Auer v. Robbins and related cases,...more
Recently, the Federal Circuit issued a series of decisions that address the rights and immunities that the federal and state government have when they become party to a post-grant proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
In Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 17-1594, Justice SOTOMAYOR wrote for the majority to overturn a Federal Circuit decision that the U.S. Postal Service had standing to petition for covered business method review. The...more
The Supreme Court ruled in Return Mail that a federal agency is not a "person" who may challenge an issued patent in inter partes review, post-grant review, or CBM review under the AIA. In its 6–3 decision in Return Mail,...more
In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Government is not a “person” capable of petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) to institute patent review proceedings...more
On June 10, 2019 the United States Supreme Court held in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 587 U.S. ____ (2019) that agencies of the federal government cannot challenge the validity of a patent via USPTO...more
In a recent 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the U.S. Postal Service and other federal agencies are prohibited from challenging the validity of patents post-issuance under the proceedings created by the Leahy-Smith...more
On June 10, 2019 in a 6-to-3 decision, Return Mail v. United States Postal Service, No. 17–1594, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that, based on principles of statutory interpretation, a federal agency is not a “person” that...more
The Supreme Court ruled Monday in a 6-3 decision that federal agencies may not file America Invents Act (AIA) petitions at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service et al.,...more
Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s finding that the government is a “person” eligible to petition for post-issuance AIA review proceedings. This 6-3 decision, Return Mail, Inc....more
The validity of a patent can be challenged in four different types of proceedings: ex parte reexamination, inter partes review, post grant review, and covered business method review. An ex parte reexamination is initiated by...more
The US Supreme Court’s decision in Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Service removes the ability of federal agencies to seek post-issuance review of a US patent under the inter partes, covered business method or post-grant...more
The US Supreme Court has now held that a federal agency is not a “person” under the America Invents Act (AIA). Therefore, a federal agency cannot be a petitioner seeking review under the various AIA patent review procedures....more
Who — or what — is a “person” authorized under the America Invents Act (“AIA”) to challenge the validity of patents in Patent Office proceeding? That is the question that the Supreme Court answered on Monday, holding that the...more
Earlier this week, orders were issued in several investigations indicating that Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) Thomas B. Pender had retired from the ITC. The orders indicated that because of his retirement, the...more
On July 20, 2018, the Federal Circuit held that tribal sovereign immunity is not available as a defense in IPR. Allergan Pharmaceuticals owned patents that it had asserted in litigation against various generic...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Moore, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Tribal sovereign immunity does not shield Indian Tribe owned patents from IPR. ...more