The Supreme Court ruled in Peter v. NantKwest today that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) cannot recover the salaries of USPTO attorneys and paralegals who work on civil actions against the USPTO Director in the Eastern District of Virginia. The Court held that the language of Section 145 of the Patent Act, which says that applicants must pay all the expenses of the proceedings for a civil action, “does not overcome the American Rule’s presumption against fee shifting.” The USPTO argued that the Federal Circuit’s en banc 2018 decision holding “all expenses” does not include “expenses that the USPTO incurs when its employees, including attorneys, defend the agency in Section 145 litigation,” is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of “expenses” and Section 145’s “history and purpose.”
Recent Posts
- In the Final Round of Harris vs. Trump: Who is Better for IP Rights?
- Cellspin Attempt at Recusal in Case Against Fitbit Falls Flat at CAFC
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, November 1: USCO Grants Right to Repair Copyright Exemption to Restaurants; EU Hits Teva with $503 Million Fine for Misusing Patent System; and Former USPTO Director Andrei Iancu Endorses Trump
- CAFC Affirms Several PTAB Findings that Centripetal’s Network Security Patent Claims are Obvious
- Perlmutter Gets Pressure from Congress to Release AI Reports