|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-804||Fed. Cir.||TBD||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2018|
Issues: (1) Whether, and under what circumstances, assignors and their privies are free to contest a patent's validity; and (2) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit erred in holding that proof of but-for causation, without more, satisfies the requirement that damages be apportioned between patented and un-patented features.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 30 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 3, 2018)|
|Dec 12 2017||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, EVE-USA, Inc., et al.|
|Dec 13 2017||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Mentor Graphics Corporation.|
|Jan 02 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Law Scholar filed.|
|Jan 02 2018||Brief amici curiae of Eighteen Intellectual Property Law Professors filed.|
|Jan 03 2018||Waiver of right of respondent Mentor Graphics Corporation to respond filed.|
|Jan 03 2018||Brief amici curiae of HP Inc., et al. filed.|
|Jan 03 2018||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors and Public Knowledge filed.|
|Jan 10 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2018.|
|Jan 17 2018||Response Requested. (Due February 16, 2018)|
|Jan 18 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 16, 2018 to March 19, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jan 22 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 19, 2018|
|Mar 19 2018||Brief of respondent Mentor Graphics Corporation in opposition filed.|
|Mar 27 2018||Reply of petitioners EVE-USA, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Apr 04 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/20/2018.|
|Apr 23 2018||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
|Aug 16 2018||Stipulation to dismiss the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 46 filed.|
|Aug 17 2018||Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
How has COVID-19 changed the Supreme Court? And are any of those changes worth keeping? Today we launch a symposium examining those questions.
First up, a piece from @stevenmazie on how to reform oral arguments after the pandemic.
The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will return to normal operations when the 2021-22 term begins ...
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...