Petitions / Supreme Court Activity

This post summarizes the recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit.

Here are the details.

Granted Cases

There is no new activity to report.

Petition Cases

New Petitions

In The Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Techtronic Industries Co., et al., the petitioner presented the following issue for review:

“Whether the Federal Circuit improperly expanded § 101’s narrow implicit exceptions by failing to properly assess Chamberlain’s claims ‘as a whole,’ where the claims recite an improvement to a machine and leave ample room for other inventors to apply any underlying abstract principles in different ways.”

New Responses

In Baley v. United States, the United States filed its brief in opposition to the petition of certiorari. The United States contends that Baley’s petition should be denied because:

[t]he court of appeals’ decision does not conflict with any decision of this Court or another court of appeals, and it is consistent with all relevant interim determinations made by the KBA adjudicator.

Furthermore, the United States claims:

the courts’ rejection of petitioners’ takings claims is sustainable on independent grounds.

The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations also submitted its brief in opposition to the petition of certiorari. The Federation argues the petition should be denied because

[t]he Federal Circuit’s decision simply confirmed long-standing precedent that the Klamath Basin Tribes’ reserved water rights exist, [and] are senior to other rights in the Klamath Basin.

New Replies

In Celgene Corp. v. Peter, Celgene submitted a reply to Laura A. Peter’s brief in opposition. In its reply, Celgene refutes the government’s claim that patents are not property asserting that:

the patentee holds a vested property interest in a patent that ‘shall have the attributes of personal property’; those property rights are only ‘[s]ubject to the provisions of this title.’

Moreover, Celgene claims the AIA’s changes are not “merely procedural” as the government claims and argues that the amendments affect a substantive right because “eliminating the right to amend claims is tantamount to a substantive change.”

Amicus Briefs

There is no new activity to report.

Denied Petitions

The Supreme Court denied the petitions for certiorari for the following three cases this week: