InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 7
Posts 241
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/04/2018

Re: Toanoman post# 52128

Friday, 08/24/2018 5:24:07 PM

Friday, August 24, 2018 5:24:07 PM

Post# of 96919
Justice Thomas defended PTAB and said it did not violate Article III of constitution.
Chief Justice in dissenting opinion claimed it weakened Article III.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _________________ No. 16–712 _________________ OIL STATES ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, PETITIONER v. GREENE’S ENERGY GROUP, LLC, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT [April 24, 2018] JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, 35 U. S. C. §100 et seq., establishes a process called “inter partes review.” Under that process, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is authorized to reconsider and to cancel an issued patent claim in limited circumstances. In this case, we address whether inter partes review violates Article III or the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution. We hold that it violates neither.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.