| 23-1217 |
Chestek PLLC v. Kathi Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office |
Federal Circuit |
2024-05-15 |
Denied |
Amici (5) |
administrative-law agency-rulemaking federal-circuit notice-and-comment patent-office patent-trademark-office rulemaking statutory-interpretation |
Whether the PTO is exempt from notice-and-comment requirements when exercising its rulemaking power under 35 U.S.C. § 2(b)(2). |
| 23-347 |
Rowland J. Martin, Jr. v. Edward Bravenec, et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2023-10-03 |
Denied |
|
civil-rights judicial-review micro-entity micro-entity-inventor patent-franchise patent-law patent-office purchase-money-lien quiet-title quiet-title-relief removal-proceeding slapp-suit |
In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the Court said "Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it." Before the Court is a nove… |
| 23-230 |
Personalized Media Communication, LLC v. Apple Inc. |
Federal Circuit |
2023-09-12 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
docket-management due-process equitable-doctrine patent patent-infringement patent-office patent-prosecution patent-validity prosecution-laches statutory-deadlines |
1. Whether prosecution laches can be based on an applicant's prosecution of a patent application in compliance with the PTO's docket-management decisi… |
| 21-7007 |
Amador Rodriguez v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division |
Fifth Circuit |
2022-01-28 |
Denied |
IFP |
administrative-law administrative-procedure-act fintiv-factors inter-partes-review patent-act patent-office |
Question not identified. |
| 20-1631 |
Drew Hirshfeld, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Implicit, LLC, et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2021-05-21 |
GVR |
Response RequestedRelisted (2) |
administrative-law administrative-patent-judges appointments-clause constitutional-law inferior-officers judicial-appointment officer-status patent-office principal-officers separation-of-powers us-patent-and-trademark-office |
Whether, for purposes of the Appointments Clause, U.S. Const. Art. II, § 2, Cl. 2, administrative patent judges of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Offic… |
| 20-1261 |
Wi-LAN, Inc., et al. v. Drew Hirshfeld, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office |
Federal Circuit |
2021-03-11 |
Denied |
|
administrative-law appointments-clause constitutional-law inferior-officer judicial-review patent patent-office principal-officer separation-of-powers statutory-interpretation uspto |
1. Whether, for purposes of the Appointments Clause, U.S. Const. Art. II, § 2, Cl. 2, administrative patent judges of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Of… |
| 20-853 |
Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Fall Line Patents, LLC, et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2020-12-28 |
GVR |
Response RequestedRelisted (3) |
administrative-law administrative-patent-judges appointments-clause constitutional-interpretation department-head inferior-officers officer-status patent-office principal-officers separation-of-powers us-patent-and-trademark-office |
Whether, for purposes of the Appointments Clause, U.S. Const. Art. II, § 2, Cl. 2, administrative patent judges of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Offic… |
| 20-631 |
Hologic, Inc., et al. v. Minerva Surgical, Inc. |
Federal Circuit |
2020-11-10 |
Denied |
|
administrative-proceedings america-invents-act assignor-estoppel collateral-estoppel infringement-litigation patent-infringement patent-office patent-validity |
The question presented is whether an assignor of a patent may circumvent the doctrine of assignor estoppel by challenging the validity of the assigned… |
| 20-32 |
Steve Morsa v. Andre Iancu, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office |
Federal Circuit |
2020-07-16 |
Denied |
Response WaivedRelisted (2) |
35-usc-101 abstract-idea claims-analysis federal-circuit patent patent-eligibility patent-office preemption section-101 undue-preemption |
This Court has held that any machine or process is eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, subject only to narrow exceptions where the p… |
| 19-1464 |
Christopher Primbas, et al. v. Andrei Iancu, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office |
Federal Circuit |
2020-07-07 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
abstract-idea alice-v-cls-bank claim-construction inventive-concept parker-v-flook patent-eligibility patent-office patent-prosecution prior-art |
Whether recitation in a patent claim of a combination of steps determined to be inventive over an idea is "sufficient to ensure that the patent in pra… |
| 19-1381 |
BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc. v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., fka MonoSol RX, LLC |
Federal Circuit |
2020-06-16 |
Denied |
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) |
administrative-law administrative-law-review agency-discretion appellate-jurisdiction due-process federal-circuit inter-partes-review judicial-review mandate-implementation patent patent-office sas-institute |
1. The Federal Circuit vacated three inadequate final written decisions and remanded the inter partes reviews (IPRs) with the order to implement this … |
| 19-1204 |
Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2020-04-09 |
Denied |
|
administrative-law appointments-clause constitutional-challenge due-process fifth-amendment inter-partes-review patent-law patent-law-retroactivity patent-office retroactive-application retroactivity takings |
1. Whether the retroactive application of inter partes review to patents that were applied for before the America Invents Act violates the Fifth Amend… |
| 18-1285 |
Gilbert P. Hyatt, et al. v. Andrei Iancu, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office |
Federal Circuit |
2019-04-10 |
Denied |
Amici (2) |
administrative-law mandamus manual-of-patent-examining-procedure patent-act patent-and-trademark-office patent-appeal patent-appeal-rights patent-appeals patent-examination patent-examiner patent-office patent-office-procedure patent-prosecution statutory-interpretation steinmetz-v-allen |
Whether MPEP § 1207.04 violates patent applicants' statutory right of appeal following a second rejection. |
| 18-961 |
Mitchell R. Swartz v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2019-01-24 |
Denied |
Response WaivedRelisted (2) |
35-usc-145 35-usc-section-145 administrative-law civil-rights due-process evidence evidence-review judicial-procedure patent patent-application patent-law-35-usc-145 patent-office standing takings |
Has The Court Erred by not being consistent with Decisions of this court Regarding The Requirement of 35 U.S.C. §145 Claims (Count 1) to Address the N… |
| 18-899 |
Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2019-01-11 |
Denied |
|
administrative-law administrative-proceeding federal-circuit indian-tribe inter-partes-review patent-challenge patent-law patent-office patent-trial-and-appeal-board sovereign-immunity tribal-sovereign-immunity |
Whether inter partes review before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board is the type of proceeding in which tribal sovereign immunity may be asserted. |
| 18-861 |
WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corporation |
Federal Circuit |
2019-01-07 |
Denied |
Response WaivedRelisted (2) |
agency-procedure discovery due-process inter-partes-review patent-invalidation patent-litigation patent-office patent-office-procedures privy real-party-in-interest standing statutory-interpretation time-bar |
35 U.S.C. §315(b) bars the Patent Office from instituting inter partes review proceedings to challenge a patent's validity "if the petition requesting… |
| 18-468 |
SSL Services, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. |
Federal Circuit |
2018-10-12 |
Denied |
Amici (1)Response Waived |
35-usc-325(d) administrative-law administrative-procedure estoppel inter-partes-review judicial-review patent-office patent-review patent-validity predictability prior-art statutory-interpretation |
1. Whether courts may review an agency's ruling on whether the § 325(d) Multiple-Proceedings rule applies and bars an IPR's institution when (1) the a… |
| 18-388 |
Nigel Parker, et al. v. Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, Patent and Trademark Office |
Federal Circuit |
2018-09-26 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
5-usc-706(2)(e) administrative-law administrative-procedure agency-action agency-overreach arbitrary-and-capricious patent patent-law patent-office patent-office-rejection publication publication-standard publication-under-35-usc-102(b) record-evidence substantial-evidence |
In Dickinson v. Zurko, 527 U.S. 150 (1999), this Court held that The United States Patent Office must support rejection with substantial evidence. See… |