Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Centripetal Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2021-1888 · judgment June 23, 2022


Certiorari denied · December 5, 2022
Pre-decision estimate: 7% cert probability (95% interval 5%–11%)

Before the decision, about 1.7× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a petition filed soon after the judgment below, and a Federal Circuit decision below, and down for a business respondent.

Question presented

28 U.S.C. §455(f) aims to preserve judicial resources and avoid the harsh consequences of recusal when a minor financial interest is discovered after a federal judge has already invested substantial time and effort into a matter. Specifically, it provides that a judge who “discover[s]” an insubstantial financial interest in a party “after substantial judicial time has been devoted to [a] matter” need not “disqualif[y]” himself as long as he “divests … the interest that provides the grounds for the disqualification.” Here, the district judge discovered, years into this complex patent litigation, after a 22-day bench trial, and on the eve of granting judgment for the plaintiff, that his spouse owned 100 shares of the defendant’s stock, worth $4,687.99 in total. The judge recognized the need to redress the interest and that “the simplest thing would be to sell the stock.” But as he knew that he would shortly issue an opinion which would adversely affect the defendant’s stock, he concluded that selling the stock at that point would create appearance problems and “undermine the purpose of section 455.” The judge instead decided to divest the stock into a blind trust. He later entered judgment for the plaintiff. The Federal Circuit wiped out that judgment and years of judicial effort without ever addressing the merits, holding that employing a blind trust is not “divest[ment]” under §455(f) and that the district judge’s use of the former was not harmless error. The question presented is: Whether placing stock in a blind trust satisfies §455(f)and, if not, whether placing trivial amounts

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Paul D. Clement
Clement & Murphy, PLLC

For respondent
Mark Christopher Fleming
WilmerHale

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Amicus briefs
4 cert-stage

Proceedings

  1. Dec 05 2022
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Nov 09 2022
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/2/2022.
  3. Nov 09 2022
    Reply of petitioner Centripetal Networks, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
  4. Oct 26 2022
    Brief of respondent Cisco Systems, Inc. in opposition filed.
  5. Oct 17 2022
    Brief amici curiae of Committee for Justice and Conservatives for Property Rights filed.
  6. Oct 17 2022
    Brief amicus curiae of Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs filed.
  7. Oct 14 2022
    Brief amicus curiae of Fair Inventing Fund filed.
  8. Oct 10 2022
    Brief amicus curiae of Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund filed.
  9. Sep 27 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 16, 2022.
  10. Sep 26 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 17, 2022 to November 16, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
  11. Sep 22 2022
    Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Centripetal Networks, Inc.
  12. Sep 13 2022
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 17, 2022)