Security People, Inc. v. Drew Hirshfeld, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al.
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess FifthAmendment Securities Patent Trademark JusticiabilityDoctri
Whether the retroactive application of inter partes review deprived Petitioner of its vested property in violation of the Due Process Clause
QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Questions presented by this Petition are: Whether the retroactive application of inter partes review under the Leahy—Smith America Invents Act, Pub. L. No. 112-29, 125 Stat. 284 (2011), the “AIA”, to Petitioner’s patent issued eight years before the passage of the AJA deprived Petitioner of its vested property in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment? Petitioner seeks injunctive relief and is not asserting a “just compensation” claim. Retroactive application of inter partes review was expressly left open in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 13865, 1379 (2018): “We emphasize the narrowness of our holding. We address the constitutionality of inter partes review only... Moreover, we address only the precise constitutional challenges that Oil States raised here. Oil States does not challenge the retroactive application of inter partes review, even though that procedure was not in place when its patent issued. Nor has Oil States raised a due process challenge.” Whether the Federal Circuit erred in its published opinion affirming that the district court lacked jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 13831 to entertain Petitioner’s as applied constitutional challenge to the retroactive application of inter partes review to its patent issued in 2003. ii RULE 29.6 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT The parties to this proceeding are those listed on the cover: Petitioner Security People, Inc., and Respondents Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. Petitioner Security People, Inc. is wholly owned by Asil Gokcebay, an individual, and no publicly held corporation owns a 10% or greater interest in Security People, Inc. RELATED CASES e Security People, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 18-cv-06180HSG, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Judgment entered June 10, 2019. e Security People, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 2019-2118, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Judgment entered August 20, 2020. Rehearing denied November 6, 2020.