The no-change decision in Cuozzo was the biggest immediate patent law news from June 20, 2016. However, two other actions by the court that day may end up having a greater long term impact. Namely, that same day the court called for the views of the US Solicitor General (CVSG) in both Impression Products v. Lexmark and Sandoz v. Amgen.
- Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., No. 15-1189 (petition for writ of certiorari filed March 21, 2016; 8 briefs filed in support).
Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., et al., No. 15-1039 (petition for writ of ceritorari filed February 16, 2016; 4 briefs filed in support); and Amgen Inc., et al. v. Sandoz Inc., No. 15-1195 (counter-petition filed March 21, 2016).
Standing alone, a CVSG order significantly increases the odds that a particular case will be granted certiorari. Those odds would then be significantly increased again if the SG supports certiorari. These cases are largely ancillary to patent prosecutors because they focus on how a patent is used. Yet, their impact could shape the business model of patents licenses as property.