No. 20-1003
Christy, Inc. v. United States
Amici (1)Response Waived
Tags: compensation government-fees inter-partes-review patent patent-exaction patent-invalidation post-grant-review private-property property-rights takings-clause
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Antitrust Takings FifthAmendment DueProcess Patent Trademark TradeSecret JusticiabilityDoctri Jurisdiction ClassAction
SocialSecurity Antitrust Takings FifthAmendment DueProcess Patent Trademark TradeSecret JusticiabilityDoctri Jurisdiction ClassAction
Latest Conference:
2021-02-19
Question Presented (from Petition)
1) When a duly-issued patent is invalidated through a post-grant review process (such as an IPR), must compensation be paid under the Takings Clause?
2) When a duly-issued patent is invalidated through a post-grant review process (such as an IPR), should the issuance and maintenance fees that were demanded by the government by mistake be returned?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When a duly-issued patent is invalidated through a post-grant review process (such as an IPR), must compensation be paid under the Takings Clause?
Docket Entries
2021-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2021-02-17
Brief amicus curiae of Masimo Corporation filed. (Received Feb. 25, 2021)
2021-02-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
2021-02-02
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Christy, Inc.
2021-01-29
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-01-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 25, 2021)
Attorneys
Christy, Inc.
James Francis McDonough III — Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC, Petitioner
Fair Inventing Fund
Laurence Henry Tribe — Harvard Law School, Amicus
Masimo Corporation
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent