Specialty Fertilizer Products, LLC v. Shell Oil Company, et al.

Whether the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) can by reexamination lawfully revoke a duly issued U.S. patent based upon written testimonial declarations of biased adverse witnesses having no duty of candor to the PTO, while completely barring all confrontation and crossexamination of those adverse witnesses.

Whether the PTO can lawfully “decline to address” a due process confrontation claim, including the specific underlying facts confirming a due process right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, while prohibiting any confrontation and cross-examination of the adverse witnesses.

Whether the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit can lawfully avoid deciding a due process confrontation claim by resort to a one-word, Rule 36 affirmance of the PTO’s decision wholly refusing to even consider the claim, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 144 and the common law duty to decide novel and important constitutional issues with articulate reasoning subject to Supreme Court review.

Whether inter partes reexamination—an adversarial process used by the PTO to adjudicate the validity of existing patents—violates the Constitution by extinguishing private party rights through a nonArticle III forum without a jury. PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING The parties to the proceeding include those identified in the caption as well as the Director of the