by Dennis Crouch
The Supreme Court has denied certiorari in all of the patent cases it considered in its first conference of the October 2024 term:
- Denied: 23-1349 Provisur Technologies, Inc. v. Weber, Inc.. Does an on sale product constitute a printed publication that can be asserted in an IPR.
- Denied: 23-1298 United Therapeutics Corporation v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc. Whether the IPR statute and SAS require the Federal Circuit to review de novo, or only for an abuse of discretion, the PTO's reliance on new grounds and new printed publications—not raised in the initial petition?
- Denied: 23-1231 Cellect, LLC v. Vidal. Whether a patent procured in good faith can be invalidated on the ground that statutory Patent Term Adjustment created an improper term extension under the judge-made doctrine of obviousness type double patenting.
- Denied: 23-1217 Chestek PLLC v. Vidal. Whether the PTO is exempt from notice-and-comment requirements when exercising its rulemaking power under 35 U.S.C. § 2(b)(2).
- Denied: 23-1184 Eolas Technologies v. Amazon.com, Inc. Whether the claims recite patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and Alice Corp.
- Denied: 23-1142 Surti v. Fleet Engineers, Inc. Whether the Court erred in denying proper compensation.
Only a handful of cases are still pending before the court:
To continue reading, become a Patently-O member. Already a member? Simply log in to access the full post.