|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-969||Fed. Cir.||Nov 27, 2017||Apr 24, 2018||5-4||Gorsuch||OT 2017|
Holding: When the United States Patent and Trademark Office institutes an inter partes review to reconsider an already-issued patent claim, under 35 U. S. C. §§311–319, it must decide the patentability of all of the claims the petitioner has challenged.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch on April 24, 2018. Justice Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg and Sotomayor joined, and in which Justice Kagan joined except as to Part III-A.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 31 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 6, 2017)|
|Feb 28 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 5, 2017.|
|Apr 05 2017||Brief of Federal Respondents in opposition filed.|
|Apr 17 2017||Reply of petitioner SAS Institute Inc. filed.|
|Apr 19 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 11, 2017.|
|May 15 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 18, 2017.|
|May 22 2017||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jun 22 2017||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 20, 2017.|
|Jun 22 2017||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 5, 2017.|
|Jul 20 2017||Joint appendix filed. (2 Volumes) (Statement of costs filed)|
|Jul 20 2017||Brief of petitioner SAS Institute Inc. filed.|
|Jul 20 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed.|
|Sep 05 2017||Brief of Federal Respondent filed.|
|Sep 05 2017||Brief of respondent ComplementSoft, LLC filed.|
|Sep 12 2017||Motion for divided argument filed by respondent ComplementSoft, LLC.|
|Sep 12 2017||Brief amicus curiae of Houston Intellectual Property Law Association filed.|
|Oct 05 2017||Reply of petitioner SAS Institute Inc. filed.|
|Oct 06 2017||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, November 27, 2017|
|Oct 10 2017||Motion for divided argument filed by respondent DENIED.|
|Oct 12 2017||CIRCULATED|
|Oct 18 2017||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit.|
|Oct 18 2017||Record received from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Nov 27 2017||Argued. For petitioner: Gregory A. Castanias, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Jonathan C. Bond, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Apr 24 2018||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Gorsuch, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg and Sotomayor, JJ., joined, and in which Kagan, J., joined except as to Part III-A.|
|May 29 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
A surprising stat at this point in the term: Both Kagan and Breyer have been in the majority slightly more often than Alito.
Kavanaugh continues to have the highest rate (as he has for most of the term). Sotomayor has the lowest.
Still 15 cases left. So this could all change.
The first two pieces in our symposium on yesterday's decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia are up. First, @JimOleske dissects the decision in light of the court's shadow-docket ruling in Tandon v. Newsom, which took a very different approach to free exercise.
Fulton quiets Tandon’s thunder: A free exercise puzzle - SCOTUSblog
This article is the first entry in a symposium on the court’s decision in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. ...
Number of pages written by each justice in the five decisions handed down this week (majority opinions, concurrences, and dissents all included):
While today's decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia is a win for a Catholic group seeking to participate in the city's foster program, it stops short of the broad endorsement of religious freedom the challengers had hoped for. Here's @AHoweBlogger's analysis:
Court holds that city’s refusal to make referrals to faith-based agency violates Constitution - SCOTUSblog
In a clash between religious freedom and public policies that protect LGBTQ people, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday...
Now do we say that Sonia Sotomayor and the other liberals supported child slavery by all voting for Nestle today? Of course not. And Nestle’s lawyers like @Neal_katyal obviously don’t either. The cheap attacks on the court and thoughtful lawyers did not age well. -tg
The claim @nealkatyal was defending slavery is flat wrong & libelous. Here is what he actually said, which is the reverse: child slavery is abhorrent, criminal, horrific. Remember in a pending case he can't comment, so read what he really said in full.
Tired from this morning's momentous opinions? Get ready to do it all again next week -- three times. The court just revealed that next Monday, Wednesday and Friday will all be opinion days.
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.