Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
09-1159	Federal Cir.	Feb 28, 2011 Tr.Aud.	Jun 6, 2011	7-2	Roberts	OT 2010

Holding: The Bayh-Dole Act does not automatically vest title to federally funded inventions in federal contractors or authorize contractors to unilaterally take title to such inventions.

Plain English Holding: The right to patent an invention ordinarily belongs to the person who created the invention, rather than to the inventor’s employer (unless the employer and employee agree otherwise). That rule does not change simply because the invention was created with the assistance of federal funding.

Judgment: Affirmed on June 6, 2011. Justice Sotomayor joined the Court’s opinion but also filed a concurring opinion; Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Ginsburg.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

• Opinion analysis: Court rejects implied vesting of patents in federal contractors (Ronald Mann)
• Argument recap: Court skeptical of federal interest in government-funded inventions. (Ronald Mann)
• Argument preview: Court considers ownership for government-sponsored patents (Ronald Mann)

Briefs and Documents

Merits Briefs

• Brief of Petitioner Board of Trustees of Stanford University
• Brief for Respondents Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.
• Reply Brief of the Petitioner Board of Trustees of Stanford University

Amicus Briefs

• Brief for Birch Bayh in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for John Sutton Suggesting Reversal
• Brief for American Intellectual Property Law Association in Support of Neither Party
• Brief for the United States in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Bayhdole25, Inc., in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Association of American Universities, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Council on Education, Association of American Medical Colleges, Association of Independent Research Institutes, Association of Public and Landgrant Universities, the Association of University Technology Managers, Council on Governmental Relations, In Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Alexander M. Shukh, PH.D. in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Intellectual Property Owners Association in Support of Respondent
• Brief for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America in Support of Respondent
• Brief for Intel Corporation, Eli Lilly and Company, Johnson and Johnson, Life Technologies Corporation, Pfizer, Inc., and SAP America, Inc. in Support of Respondent
• Brief for Biotechnology Industry Organization in Support of Respondent
• Brief for the American Association of University Professors, IEEE-USA, and IP Advocate in Support of Affirmance

Certiorari-stage documents

• Opinion below (Federal Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition (unavailable)
• Amicus brief of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Amicus brief of the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation et al. (unavailable)
• Amicus brief of the Association of American Universities et al. (unavailable)
• Petitioner's reply (unavailable)
• Supplemental brief for respondents (unavailable)