|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1594||Fed. Cir.||Feb 19, 2019||Jun 10, 2019||6-3||Sotomayor||OT 2018|
Holding: The federal government is not a “person” capable of petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to institute patent review proceedings under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on June 10, 2019. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg and Kagan joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 16 2018||Application (17A879) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 15, 2018 to May 14, 2018, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Feb 28 2018||Application (17A879) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until May 14, 2018.|
|May 14 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 25, 2018)|
|Jun 12 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Return Mail, Inc..|
|Jun 22 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 25, 2018 to July 25, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jun 22 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 25, 2018.|
|Jun 25 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Kenneth O. Simon filed.|
|Jun 25 2018||Brief amici curiae of 15 Law Professors filed.|
|Jul 17 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 25, 2018 to August 24, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Jul 18 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including August 24, 2018.|
|Aug 13 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 24, 2018 to September 7, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Aug 13 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including September 7, 2018.|
|Sep 07 2018||Brief of respondents United States Postal Service, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Sep 21 2018||Reply of petitioner Return Mail, Inc. filed.|
|Sep 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/12/2018.|
|Oct 22 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.|
|Oct 26 2018||Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|Nov 26 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Return Mail, Inc.|
|Dec 10 2018||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Dec 10 2018||Brief of petitioner Return Mail, Inc. filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amici curiae of The Cato Institute and Professor Gregory Dolin filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amici curiae of Seven Law Professors filed.|
|Dec 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.|
|Dec 21 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, February 20, 2019.|
|Jan 09 2019||Brief of respondents United States Postal Service, et al. filed.|
|Jan 11 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit.|
|Jan 15 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Jan 15 2019||Brief amicus curiae of R Street Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 15 2019||Record from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is located on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office web site. Instructions to access the record is electronic. The record is complete.|
|Jan 16 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Tejas N. Narechania filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 16 2019||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Electronic Frontier Foundation.|
|Jan 23 2019||RESCHEDULED FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, February 19, 2019.|
|Jan 23 2019||Record from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on PACER. The record is complete.|
|Feb 08 2019||Reply of petitioner Return Mail, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2019||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Electronic Frontier Foundation GRANTED.|
|Feb 19 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Beth S. Brinkmann, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 10 2019||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg and Kagan, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 12 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.