This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2018/04/24/oil-states-decision/.
Posted in America, Courtroom, Law, Patents at 12:08 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Live blog of opinions (the reference page for this case has not been updated yet)
Summary: Oil States has been decided and it’s very good news for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB); even Conservatives-leaning Justices support PTAB
THE good news is here. It’s not surprising, but it’s still very good.
Dan Ravicher, a former lawyer of Free/libre software causes (who happens to be quite Conservatives-leading), wrote that “Oil States has been decided by Supreme Court, 7-2 IPRs are Constitutional. Dissent by Gorsuch and Roberts.”
=> ↺ wrote
The ruling is here. We have not checked it yet. There will be hundreds if not thousands of articles about it in the coming days. It will probably be mentioned for many years to come.
=> ↺ here
IAM retweeted Dan Ravicher and added: “Over to you, Director Iancu! Most were expecting 9-0, so 7-2 is a slight surprise. But it’s an overwhelming endordement [sic] of a status quo that only the USPTO director or Congress can now change.”
=> ↺ added
So hopes IAM. But it will be difficult to change in defiance of a 7-2 decision from the highest legal authority.
IAM’s patent extremist (Richard Lloyd), who tried to ‘appoint’/install at the top of the USPTO someone who calls PTAB “death squads”, wrote about an hour ago that the “Supreme Court issued its decision in the widely anticipated Oil States case earlier today ruling that inter partes review (IPR) is constitutional and does not violate the US Constitution’s Seventh Amendment. The nine justices split 7-2, with Justices Gorsuch writing a dissent in which he was joined by Chief Justice Roberts. In another IPR-focused case the Supreme Court also found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) must consider the patentability of all claims challenged in a post-grant review following institution. In that case, SAS Institutes v Iancu, the justices were much more closely divided with the five more conservative…”
=> tried | ↺ USPTO | ↺ about an hour ago
It’s almost a bipartisan view then. Gorsuch is the wolf many thought he would turn out to be. At least he made the Koch Brothers happy.
No word yet from Watchtroll and other messengers of patent trolls, just another ‘obligatory’ rant about PTAB today. Mr. Gross, who is writing for patent trolls, has unleashed another storm of rants about PTAB, e.g.:
=> ↺ another ‘obligatory’ rant about PTAB today | Mr. Gross
Oracle patent inventors should have predicted that “determining if locations of devices is correct according to prior transactions” is just abstract idea according to PTAB because apparently we all didn’t know that it is a “fundamental economic practice” https://e-foia.uspto.gov/Foia/RetrievePdf?system=BPAI&flNm=fd2016008640-04-16-2018-1 …
PTAB’s expansive reading of “organizing human activity” exception to 101 swallows/destroys “distance based advertising in a virtual world” filing by IBM bc human COULD replicate process in real world with 2 different pieces of paper of different sized font https://e-foia.uspto.gov/Foia/RetrievePdf?system=BPAI&flNm=fd2016008387-04-16-2018-1 …
PTAB indiscriminate 101 strategy: if invention listed as abstract idea under PTO guidelines, then game over: guidelines become end-all be-all of patentability! And even if its not on list, they say list is not binding on them, they can put it there anyway! https://e-foia.uspto.gov/Foia/RetrievePdf?system=BPAI&flNm=fd2016008387-04-16-2018-1 …
They can moan all they want, but PTAB is here to stay. █
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).