Although patent owners may be expected to pursue retroactive application, due process, and takings challenges, the major headline from Oil States v. Greene's Energy remains that inter partes reviews are here to stay, write David Cavanaugh, Mark Fleming, and William Kinder of WilmerHale.
The U.S. Supreme Court on April 24 issued its decision in the closely watched patent case Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 1365 (2018). The case addressed a constitutional challenge to inter partes review (IPR), the process created by Congress through which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) may reconsider and cancel patent claims that were previously issued. The patent owner, Oil States Energy Services, argued that IPR violated Article III of the Constitution — under which the "judicial power" of the U.S. must be vested in federal courts — and the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial.
Click here to continue reading
Originally published by Bloomberg BNA's Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
