No. 18-801

Laura Peter, Deputy Director, Patent and Trademark Office v. NantKwest, Inc.

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2018-12-21
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: Paid
Amici (11)Relisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: 35-usc-145 administrative-law civil-action civil-procedure due-process federal-circuit judicial-review patent patent-act patent-application patent-law personnel-expenses standing statutory-interpretation uspto USPTO-litigation
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Arbitration SocialSecurity ERISA Trademark Patent JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2019-03-01 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the phrase '[a]ll the expenses of the proceedings' in 35 U.S.C. 145 encompasses the personnel expenses the USPTO incurs when its employees, including attorneys, defend the agency in Section 145 litigation

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED When the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) denies a patent application, the Patent Act gives the unsuccessful applicant two avenues for seeking judicial review of the agency’s decision. The applicant may appeal directly to the Federal Circuit, 35 U.S.C. 141, which “shall review the decision from which an appeal is taken on the record before the [USPTO],” 35 U.S.C. 144. Alternatively, the applicant may bring a civil action against the Director of the USPTO in district court, where the applicant may present additional evidence. 35 U.S.C. 145. If the applicant elects to bring such an action, “[a]ll the expenses of the proceedings shall be paid by the applicant.” Zbid. The question presented is as follows: Whether the phrase “[alll the expenses of the proceedings” in 35 U.S.C. 145 encompasses the personnel expenses the USPTO incurs when its employees, including attorneys, defend the agency in Section 145 litigation. (I)

Docket Entries

2020-01-13
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2019-12-11
Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-801_o758.pdf'>opinion</a> for a unanimous Court.
2019-10-07
Argued. For petitioner: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Mr. Morgan Chu, Los Angeles, Cal.
2019-08-27
Complete record located on PACER (U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit and U.S.D.C. Eastern Dist, VA).
2019-08-16
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit.
2019-08-14
Reply of petitioner Laura Peter, Deputy Director, Patent and Trademark Office filed. (Distributed)
2019-08-01
CIRCULATED
2019-07-22
Brief amicus curiae of Association of the Bar of the City of New York filed.
2019-07-22
Brief amicus curiae of The American Bar Association filed.
2019-07-22
Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed.
2019-07-22
Brief amicus curiae of The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago filed.
2019-07-22
Brief amici curiae of The Association of Amicus Counsel, et al. filed.
2019-07-22
Brief amicus curiae of The International Trademark Association filed.
2019-07-22
Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association filed.
2019-07-22
Brief amicus curiae of IEEE-USA filed.
2019-07-15
Brief of respondent NantKwest, Inc. filed.
2019-07-01
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, October 7, 2019.
2019-06-25
Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association filed.
2019-05-24
Brief amicus curiae of Federal Circuit Bar Association in support of neither party filed.
2019-05-23
Brief amicus curiae of R Street Institute filed.
2019-05-17
Joint appendix filed.
2019-05-17
Brief of petitioner Laura Peter, Deputy Director, Patent and Trademark Office, filed.
2019-05-08
Letter of substitution of petitioner received.
2019-04-03
Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits is granted. The time to file joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including May 17, 2019. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 15, 2019.
2019-03-26
Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.
2019-03-04
Petition GRANTED.
2019-02-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.
2019-02-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.
2019-02-04
Reply of petitioner Andrei Iancu filed.
2019-01-22
Brief of respondent NantKwest, Inc. in opposition filed.
2018-12-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 22, 2019)
2018-11-14
Application (18A369) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until December 21, 2018.
2018-11-13
Application (18A369) to extend further the time from November 23, 2018 to December 21, 2018, submitted to The Chief Justice.
2018-10-05
Application (18A369) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until November 23, 2018.
2018-10-04
Application (18A369) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from October 25, 2018 to November 23, 2018, submitted to The Chief Justice.

Attorneys

American Bar Association
Robert M. CarlsonAmerican Bar Association, Amicus
Robert M. CarlsonAmerican Bar Association, Amicus
American Intellectual Property Law Assoc.
Jeffrey I. D. LewisNorton Rose Fulbright US LLP, Amicus
Jeffrey I. D. LewisNorton Rose Fulbright US LLP, Amicus
Association of the Bar of the City of New York
Philip Laurence HirschhornBuchanan lngersoll & Rooney PC, Amicus
Philip Laurence HirschhornBuchanan lngersoll & Rooney PC, Amicus
Federal Circuit Bar Association
William Paul AtkinsPillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Amicus
William Paul AtkinsPillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Amicus
IEEE-USA
Richard Alan NeifeldNeifeld IP Law, PC, Amicus
Richard Alan NeifeldNeifeld IP Law, PC, Amicus
Intellectual Property Owners Association
Gregory Andrew CastaniasJones Day, Amicus
Gregory Andrew CastaniasJones Day, Amicus
Laura Peter, Deputy Director, Patent and Trademark Office
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Petitioner
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Petitioner
NantKwest, Inc.
Morgan ChuIrell & Manella, Respondent
Morgan ChuIrell & Manella, Respondent
New York Intellectual Property Law Association
Charles Robert MacedoAmster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, Amicus
Charles Robert MacedoAmster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, Amicus
R Street Institute
Charles DuanR Street Institute, Amicus
Charles DuanR Street Institute, Amicus
The American Bar Association
Theodore H. Davis Jr.Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Amicus
Theodore H. Davis Jr.Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Amicus
The Association of Amicus Counsel, InfoTech Law Offices, Isshiki & Co., and Law Offices of Hiraide & Takahashi
Charles E. MillerThe Association of Amicus Counsel, Amicus
Charles E. MillerThe Association of Amicus Counsel, Amicus
The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago
Margaret M. DuncanMcDermott Will & Emery LLP, Amicus
Margaret M. DuncanMcDermott Will & Emery LLP, Amicus
The International Trademark Association
Lawrence K. NodineBallard Spahr, LLP, Amicus
Lawrence K. NodineBallard Spahr, LLP, Amicus