|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-1128||Fed. Cir.||Nov 5, 2013||Jan 22, 2014||9-0||Breyer||OT 2013|
Holding: When a licensee seeks a declaratory judgment against a patentee to establish that its products do not infringe the licensed patent, the patentee bears the burden of persuasion on the issue of infringement.
Judgment: Reversed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on January 22, 2014.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 14 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 17, 2013)|
|Apr 5 2013||Brief of respondent Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC in opposition filed.|
|Apr 25 2013||Reply of petitioner Medtronic, Inc. filed.|
|Apr 30 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 16, 2013.|
|May 20 2013||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 5 2013||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 26, 2013.|
|Jun 5 2013||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 16, 2013.|
|Jul 26 2013||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Jul 26 2013||Brief of petitioner Medtronic, Inc. filed.|
|Aug 2 2013||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.|
|Aug 2 2013||Brief amici curiae of Legal Scholars filed.|
|Aug 2 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Tessera Technologies, Inc. in support of neither party filed.|
|Aug 19 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Aug 20 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, November 5, 2013.|
|Sep 3 2013||Record from U.S.C.A. for Federal Circuit is electronic (Not PACER).|
|Sep 3 2013||Additional record received from U.S.C.A. for Federal. Circuit. (1 box)|
|Sep 11 2013||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Sep 16 2013||Brief of respondent Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 20 2013||Motion of Tessera Technologies, Inc. in support of neither party for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for enlarged argument or, in the alternative divided argument filed.|
|Sep 20 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Koninklijke Philips, N.V. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 23 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 30 2013||Joint opposition of the parties to motion of Tessera Technologies, Inc. for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument.|
|Oct 15 2013||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 15 2013||Motion of Tessera Technologies, Inc. in support of neither party for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument DENIED.|
|Oct 16 2013||Reply of petitioner Medtronic, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 5 2013||Argued. For petitioner: Seth P. Waxman, Washington, D. C.; and Curtis E. Gannon, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Arthur I. Neustadt, Alexandria, Va.|
|Jan 22 2014||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jan 31 2014||Record for U.S.C.A. for the Federal Circuit has been RETURNED.|
|Feb 24 2014||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).
Incidentally, Gorsuch had been scheduled to give a speech at the University of Wyoming today, but his visit was canceled due to COVID.
Nothing from Kagan or Gorsuch though 😢 https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1438530948207874050