No. 20-1339
Richard Sowinski v. California Air Resources Board
Tags: civil-procedure claim-preclusion federal-circuit infringement-suit issue-preclusion patent patent-preclusion preclusion res-judicata
Key Terms:
Patent
Patent
Latest Conference:
2021-06-24
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the Federal Circuit erred in creating and applying a patent-specific preclusion doctrine that bars new issues and new claims that would survive the "uniform" preclusion rules applied by this Court and every other circuit.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Federal Circuit erred in creating and applying a patent-specific preclusion doctrine that bars new issues and new claims that would survive the 'uniform' preclusion rules applied by this Court and every other circuit
Docket Entries
2021-06-10
Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
2021-06-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2021-06-08
Motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 46.1 filed.
2021-05-24
Brief of respondent California Air Resources Board in opposition filed.
2021-04-09
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 24, 2021.
2021-04-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 23, 2021 to May 24, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-03-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 23, 2021)
Attorneys
California Air Resources Board
Richard Sowinski
Daniel L. Geyser — Alexander Dubose & Jefferson LLP, Petitioner