Remove Court Remove Government Remove Stare Decisis
article thumbnail

Doctrinal “dinosaur” or stare decisis? Justices wrestle with patent-law precedent.

SCOTUSBlog

Hochman fielded several questions about why the court should abandon a doctrine that the court has recognized for nearly a century. Morgan Ratner argued for the federal government, which filed its own friend-of-the-court brief but supported neither party. The post Doctrinal “dinosaur” or stare decisis?

article thumbnail

Patent Puzzles after the Supreme Court’s 2024 Administrative Law Cases: Stare Decisis, Rulemaking, and Discretion

Patently O

Latty Distinguished Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law In a flurry of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has continued its skepticism of administrative agencies. Consider first stare decisis and the Court’s overruling of Chevron deference (i.e. no standing requirement).

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Word of the Month for August 2019: Stare Decisis

Legal Research is Easy

Thing is, these days law and the decisions courts hand down are very much like that. People go to one court, don't get what they want so they go to another court asking for, basically, the same thing. Of course, this brings us to our word of the month: STARE DECISIS. Schempp , 374 U.S.

article thumbnail

Intellectual Property and the Historic Kinship Between Patents and Copyrights

Patently O

We argue that the Supreme Court got it wrong in Allen v. Cooper , the Supreme Court effectively qualified this warning by adding an exception in favor of “sovereign” pirates. The Allen Court largely based its decision upon a perceived historic kinship between patents and copyrights, concluding that if not patent, then not copyright.

article thumbnail

A quiet bench on the Quiet Title Act: Justices hold muted debate on statute of limitations

SCOTUSBlog

Wilkins and the government fought in the lower courts over whether the suit, filed many years after the general public use began, was timely. For many years the court loosely referred to problems as “jurisdictional” without intending the strict consequences that follow under the modern conception of judicial authority.

Statute 102
article thumbnail

Court to decide whether an inventor may challenge the validity of the patent on the inventor’s own invention

SCOTUSBlog

Share This Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Minerva Surgical Inc. Federal courts have applied this doctrine since 1880, and the Supreme Court implicitly approved of the doctrine in 1924 in Westinghouse Electric. Applying the doctrine of assignor estoppel, however, both the district court and the U.S.

article thumbnail

India Supreme Court allows petition of 2002 communal riots victim

JURIST

The Supreme Court of India allowed a petition by Bilkis Bano on Monday against the premature release of convicts involved in the 2002 Gujarat communal riots. The court concluded that the writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution by Bano is maintainable.