Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
WhitServe LLC v. Dropbox, Inc.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2019-2334 · judgment April 26, 2021
Before the decision, roughly the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Federal Circuit decision below, a business petitioner, and counsel who has filed here before, and down for a business respondent.
Questions presented
-
If a patentee makes factual assertions and provides supporting evidence that its claimed invention is directed to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101, is a court permitted to overlook the patentee’s assertions and evidence, provide no opportunity for a hearing, ignore the perspective of a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, find that the claimed invention is directed to patentineligible subject matter, and dismiss the patentee’s complaint with prejudice despite the requirements of Rule 12(b)(6) and the statutory presumption of § 282(a)?
-
Whether 35 U.S.C. § 101 requires a patent specification to explain the technological processes underlying the purported technological improvement in a patent claim, or if this encroaches on the enablement test under 35 U.S.C. § 112?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Michael Joseph Kosma
Whitmyer IP Group LLC
For respondent
Gregory Hayes Lantier
Wilmer Cutler Pickering
Case
Subject area
Economic Activity (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Order
Order list, January 10, 2022 · Certiorari denied
Proceedings
- Jan 10 2022Petition DENIED.
- Dec 22 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
- Dec 20 2021Waiver of right of respondent Dropbox, Inc. to respond filed.
- Nov 24 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 3, 2022)