|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|16-1011||Fed. Cir.||Apr 16, 2018||Jun 22, 2018||7-2||Thomas||OT 2017|
Holding: The focus of the Patent Act’s general damages provision, 35 U. S. C. §284, in a case involving infringement under Section 271(f)(2) is on the act of exporting components from the United States; therefore, WesternGeco’s award for lost profits was a permissible domestic application of Section 284, not an impermissible extraterritorial one.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on June 22, 2018. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Breyer joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Dec 08 2016||Application (16A576) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 20, 2016 to February 17, 2017, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Dec 13 2016||Application (16A576) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until February 17, 2017.|
|Feb 17 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 20, 2017)|
|Mar 08 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 19, 2017.|
|Apr 19 2017||Brief of respondent ION Geophysical Corporation in opposition filed.|
|May 08 2017||Reply of petitioner WesternGeco LLC filed.|
|May 09 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 25, 2017.|
|May 30 2017||The Acting Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
|Dec 06 2017||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Dec 20 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2018.|
|Dec 20 2017||Supplemental brief of respondent ION Geophysical Corp. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 08 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/12/2018.|
|Jan 12 2018||Petition GRANTED. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
|Jan 25 2018||Letter of amendment to corporate disclosure statement from respondent ION Geophysical Corp. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 01 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, ION Geophysical Corporation.|
|Feb 02 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, WesternGeco LLC.|
|Feb 23 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, April 16, 2018.|
|Feb 23 2018||Brief of petitioner WesternGeco LLC filed.|
|Feb 23 2018||Joint appendix filed.|
|Feb 27 2018||Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Mar 01 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Law Professor Stephen Yelderman filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 02 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Power Integrations, Inc. filed.|
|Mar 02 2018||Brief amici curiae of Intellectual Property Law Scholars in support of neither party filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 02 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Mar 02 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 02 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Houston Intellectual Property Law Association in Support of Neither Party filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 05 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed in Support of Neither Party. (Distributed)|
|Mar 05 2018||Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association filed in Support of Neither Party. (Distributed)|
|Mar 07 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 09 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Mar 26 2018||Brief of respondent ION Geophysical Corporation filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2018||Justice Alito is no longer recused in this case.|
|Mar 30 2018||Record requested from U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit.|
|Apr 02 2018||Brief amici curiae of Electronic Frontier Foundation and R Street Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 02 2018||Brief amici curiae of Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., The Internet Association, SAS Institute Inc., Symmetry, LLC, and Xilinx, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 06 2018||Record received from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of Texas Brownsville Division is electronic and can be accessed through the electronic case filing system for the Southern District of Texas. Sealed documents was sent to this Court, the record is electronic.|
|Apr 06 2018||Record from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on PACER, with the exception of 1 Box of Confidential material.|
|Apr 09 2018||Reply of petitioner WesternGeco LLC filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 13 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 16 2018||Argued. For petitioner: Paul D. Clement, Washington, D. C.; and Zachary D. Tripp, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Kannon K. Shanmugam, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 22 2018||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Ginsburg, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, J., joined.|
|Jul 24 2018||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Aug 21 2018||Record for the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit has been returned.|
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 ...
We're so excited about our April 15 Live Webinar (w/ @HarvardACS & @HarvardFedSoc), Covering the Court, featuring an all-star lineup of panelists @jduffyrice, @katieleebarlow, @whignewtons, & @stevenmazie! _👩⚖️👩⚖️👩⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️👨⚖️_ Register here ➡️ https://harvard.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k_b_9IPBQ_GV37rpsjF9kw
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.