Law Commons^™

Patently Inconsistent: State And Tribal Sovereign Immunity In Inter Partes Review, John Mixon

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note is composed of four parts. Part I reviews the origins, development, and purpose of both tribal and state sovereign immunity, compares the two doctrines, and concludes that the two are functionally the same despite deriving from different historical roots. Part II provides an overview of the history and purpose behind the patent system, the America Invents Act, and IPRs. Part II also analyzes the constitutionality of IPRs, as decided by the Supreme Court in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC. Part III introduces and addresses the five IPR decisions on state sovereign …

Disguised Patent Policymaking, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

Patent Office power has grown immensely in this decade, and the agency is wielding its power in predictably troubling ways. Like other agencies, it injects politics into its decisions while relying on technocratic justifications. It also reads grants of authority expansively to aggrandize its power, especially to the detriment of judicial checks on agency action. However, this story of Patent Office ascendancy differs from that of other agencies in two important respects. One is that the U.S. patent system still remains primarily a means for allocating property rights, not a comprehensive regime of industrial regulation. Thus, the Patent Office cannot …

Renewed Efficiency In Administrative Patent Revocation, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

Administrative patent revocation in the U.S. is poised to enter a new period of efficiency, though ironically it will be an efficiency that the America Invents Act originally put in place. The Court’s recent approval of the constitutionality of Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB") proceedings was blunted by the Court’s accompanying rejection of partial institution. This Patent Office practice of accepting and denying validity review petitions piecemeal had been a key part of the agency’s procedural structure from the start. As a result, the Court’s decision in SAS Institute v. Iancu to require a binary choice — either fully …

The Mixed Case For A Ptab Off-Ramp, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay begins from the emerging agenda in the political branches for reforming various aspects of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and focuses on a particular reform: the creation of a PTAB off-ramp whereby a patent being challenged in an administrative revocation proceeding could be removed into a system primarily aimed at amending its claims and preserving its validity. To put the proposal into perspective, the Essay presents specific empirical trends, largely unexplored until now, that implicate patent reliance interests to which the PTAB has done injury. Ultimately, because the benefits and costs from a PTAB off-ramp are …

Petitioner Estoppel From Patent Trial And Appeal Board Proceedings After Sas Institute Inc. V. Iancu, Jennifer Esch, Paula Miller, Stacy Lewis, Tom Irving

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

The Collapse Of Covered Business Method Reviews, Eleanor M. Yost

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Huge Numbers Of Patent Cases: How One District Judge Manages Them - The 2018 Supreme Court Ip Review Address, The Honorable William Alsup

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Using A Phillips Construction In All Ptab Trials: The Impact On District Court Patent Actions And Ptab Proceedings, Sarah Jelsema, Andrew Mason, John Vandenberg

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Due Process In Aia Proceedings After Sas Institute Inc. V. Iancu, Mikaela Stone, Britton Davis

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

All Or Nothing: Why The Supreme Court Sas Mandate Does Not Eliminate The Shaw Safe Harbor, Matt Johnson, Michael Lavine, Daniel Kazhdan Ph.D, Lisa Furby, David Anderson

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Administrative Oversight: Justice Gorsuch’S Patent Opinions, The Ptab, And Antagonism Toward The Administrative State, Daniel D. Kim, Jonathan Stroud

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

In his first term, Justice Neil Gorsuch has made a surprisingly forceful impact on, of all things, patent law—and even more unlikely, the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s adjudicatory arm, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Was there any way to predict, from his 10th Circuit opinions below, that he would author opinions in all three patent cases in his first term? Was this attention the result of deeply submerged but long-felt opinions on patent law, or rather a result of his sharp distrust of administrative overreach? We analyze 10th Circuit and Supreme Court opinions authored by Justice Gorsuch, …

Consequences For Patent Owners If A Patent Is Unconstitutionally Invalidated By The Patent Trial And Appeal Board, Mark Magas

Chicago-Kent Law Review

There have been many constitutional challenges against the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) since it was created by the America Invents Act in 2011. While the merits of these challenges have been widely debated, there has been little analysis of what would happen if one of these challenges succeeded and patents are found to have been unconstitutionally invalidated. This note examines how issues with waiver, retroactivity, and finality may prevent patent owners from getting their patent rights back, considering the type of constitutional challenge and the different stages of the PTAB process. While the odds are stacked against patent …

The Non-Doctrine Of Redundancy, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores and evaluates a controversial practice that the Patent Office undertook beginning early in the post-AIA regime, the practice of denying otherwise meritorious requests for review because of what the Office termed "redundant" grounds. The controversy over redundancy-based rejections had several sources. One was that making such rejections required the Patent Office to decide petitions piecemeal—and, indeed, the agency claimed that power for itself—even though it was not clear that this power lay within the statute. Another source was that the Patent Office persistently declined to explain what, in the agency's view, did or did not constitute redundancy. …

Sovereign Immunity For Rent: How The Commodification Of Tribal Sovereign Immunity Reflects The Failures Of The U.S. Patent System, Katrina G. Geddes

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

Last year, a Fortune 500 pharmaceutical company attempted to rent the sovereign immunity of an American Indian tribe in order to shield its patents on a dry-eye drug from invalidation by generic competitors in inter partes review. Pharmaceutical firms are notorious for pursuing unconventional methods to extend the duration of their patents and, in this sense, the maneuver is unsurprising. The exploitation, however, of an historically disenfranchised community with limited economic opportunities is particularly unsettling. This Article will provide, firstly, a factual summary of the legal background of this case; secondly, a review of the February 2018 decision of the …

Prior Art In Inter Partes Review, Stephen Yelderman

Journal Articles

This Essay is an empirical study of the evidence the Patent Trial and Appeal Board relies upon when cancelling patents in inter partes review. To construct our dataset, we collected every final written decision invalidating a patent claim over a twelve-month period. We coded individual invalidation events on a reference-by-reference, claim-by-claim basis. Drawing on this dataset, we report a number of details about the prior art supporting patent cancellation, including the frequency with which U.S. patents, foreign patents, and printed publications were cited, the frequency with which the invalidating prior art would have been amenable to a pre-filing prior art …

State Immunity And The Patent Trial And Appeal Board, Tejas N. Narechania

Tejas N. Narechania