Where Plaintiffs' theories of trade secret ownership, misappropriation, and damages depend on deciding the patent law issues of inventorship, claim construction, and infringement, does Plaintiffs' claim 'necessarily arise,' under Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251, 258 (2013), from patent law, thereby justifying removal under 28 U.S.C. §1451

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Where Plaintiffs’ theories of trade secret ownership, misappropriation, and damages depend on deciding the patent law issues of inventorship, claim construction, and infringement, does Plaintiffs’ claim “necessarily arise,” under Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251, 258 (2013), from patent law, thereby justifying removal under 28 U.S.C. §1451, of the claim to district court? (2) May a state court control jurisdiction over a federal patent law claim and removal under 28 U.S.C. §1454 by declining to make the notice of removal “operative” under state court procedures in contravention to Congress’ intent as implemented in the American Invents Act and risking uniformity in application of patent law principles? ep)