No. 20-1396

Walter A. Tormasi v. Western Digital Corporation

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2021-04-06
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: civil-rights due-process equal-protection inmate-access patent patent-rights property-rights standing state-agencies takings
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27
Question Presented (from Petition)

Does imprisonment (1) forfeit a patent owner's right not to be deprived of personal property without due process of law and (2) render a person wholly without equal protection of the law?

2. Does Lewis v. Casey, stating that the right of access to the courts "does not guarantee inmates the wherewithal to transform themselves into litigating engines," enable state agencies to affirmatively eliminate an inmate's access to court on general civil matters?

3. The patent statute authorizes patent owners to enforce their constitutionally recognized exclusionary rights in federal court. Did the lower courts create a dangerous slippery slope that (1) establishes a mechanism by which states can, via an administrative rule, nullify federally granted statutory rights and (2) oppresses prisoners by depriving them of property without redress?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does imprisonment forfeit a patent owner's right not to be deprived of personal property without due process of law and render a person wholly without equal protection of the law?

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-10
Reply of petitioner Walter Tormasi filed.
2021-05-28
Brief of respondent Western Digital Corporation in opposition filed.
2021-04-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 28, 2021.
2021-04-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 6, 2021 to May 28, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-04-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 6, 2021)

Attorneys

Walter Tormasi
Thomas Arthur LewryBrooks Kushman P.C., Petitioner
Western Digital Corporation
Erica D. WilsonWalters Wilson LLP, Respondent