Remove Laws Remove Stare Decisis Remove Statute
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).

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Gives Stare Decisis Effect to a Judgment of Claim Validity

Patently O

Stare decisis, Latin for “to stand by things decided,” is a legal principle that directs courts to adhere to previous judgments, i.e., precedent, when resolving a case with comparable facts. the Federal Circuit applied stare decisis to a prior validity ruling involving a different patent and a different accused infringer.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

In family’s lawsuit against public nursing home, court revisits private rights of action and the spending clause

SCOTUSBlog

Talevski , to be argued Tuesday, returns the court to the question of when federal law is subject to private enforcement. 1983 — which allows private suits for state and local deprivations of rights secured by federal law—to enforce federal statutes enacted under Congress’ spending clause power.

article thumbnail

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

SCOTUSBlog

The doctrine stems from the common-law principle that one who sells property to another generally should not be able to undermine the value of the property by later challenging the rights the seller conveyed in the first place. A possible middle ground. But a middle ground exists. The court could maintain the doctrine but limit its scope.

article thumbnail

Justices to consider scope of “clear and unmistakable error” review of Veterans Affairs decisions

SCOTUSBlog

The relevant statute , regulating disability benefits, provides that “the United States will pay [compensation] to any veteran” who is “disabled” as a result of (1) “personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty,” or (2) “aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty.” military veterans.

Statute 107
article thumbnail

Two death penalty cases and free speech at animal facilities

SCOTUSBlog

Andrus further argues that the Texas court’s decision conflicts with “vertical stare decisis,” the principle that lower courts must follow the Supreme Court’s decisions. The law defines an animal facility as any place that houses or breeds animals used for food production, agriculture, or research. The case is Young v.

article thumbnail

Justices uphold a narrow version of patent assignor estoppel

SCOTUSBlog

” The court’s second example concerned a change in the law. If a previously valid patent becomes invalid due to a change in the law, “no principle of consistency prevents the assignor from saying so.”. In carving out this limitation, Kagan cited Mark Lemley’s influential article, “ Rethinking Assignor Estoppel.”