LAIPLALAIPLA
LAIPLALAIPLA
  • About
    • About LAIPLA
    • Ambassador Outreach Program
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Administration
    • Member Firms and Companies
    • Past Presidents
    • Recent Past Presidents
    • Public Service Award
    • Diversity Fellowship
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • Membership
  • Sponsorship
  • Contact
  • About
    • About LAIPLA
    • Ambassador Outreach Program
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Administration
    • Member Firms and Companies
    • Past Presidents
    • Recent Past Presidents
    • Public Service Award
    • Diversity Fellowship
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • Membership
  • Sponsorship
  • Contact

New! Top Ten No. (9a) Cooper v. Lee: Serious IPR Constitutional Challenge

April 16, 2016| in Wegner's Writings| by Hal Wegner

New Top Ten No. (9a),  Cooper v. Lee, Supreme Court No. 15-955, presents a serious Constitutional direct or implicit challenge to the several post-grant review procedures at the Patent Office, here, in the context of a direct challenge to Inter Partes Review.

The Mossoff Amicus Brief:  Petitioner is represented by the Greenspan-Dhuey team that successful opened the door to en banc review of Cybor de novo claim construction. The team represents petitioner (Robert P. Greenspoon as lead counsel) and amicus Professor Adam Mossoff (Andrew J. Dhuey).  The amicus effort cites the important scholarship of Adam Mossoff in his two important law review articles, Patents as Constitutional Private Property: The Historical Protection of Patents under the Takings Clause, 87 B. U. L. Rev. 689 (2007); and Exclusion and Exclusive Use in Patent Law, 22 Harv. J. L. & Tech. 321 (2009)).

Top Ten No. (9b) MCM Portfolio v. Hewlett-Packard:  Through the accident of timing, the expected parallel Supreme Court challenge in MCM Portfolio LLC v. Hewlett-Packard Co.,opinion below, __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. Dec. 2, 2015)(Dyk, J.), is behind Cooper v. Lee and probably  will not be considered for certiorari until after a certiorari decision in Cooper. 

The two cases are reviewed in an updated Top Ten Patent cases, as attached.

TopTenCasesApril17

Regards,
Hal

IP Blog Categories

  • Announcements
  • Events
  • LAIPLA News
  • The TTABlog
  • Uncategorized
  • Wegner's Top 10
  • Wegner's Writings

Archives

Previous

Top Ten No. (9) MCM Portfolio, Is IPR Unconstitutional?

Next

“Limelight II”, Certiorari DENIED, Final Nail in the Limelight Coffin


Since 1934, LAIPLA has been educating and connecting members of the local intellectual property legal community

Pages

About 
Events
Membership
Sponsorship
Contact
Privacy Policy

Search
Contact

LAIPLA
1621 W 25th Street
Box 633
San Pedro, CA 90732
Phone: (323) 285-1654
Fax: ( 310) 878-0517
Email: office@laipla.net

© 2025 Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association. All Rights Reserved | Website design by SafeHouse Web.