Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
ParkerVision, Inc. v. TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd., et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2023-1415
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition) and a Federal Circuit decision below, and down for a business respondent.
Question presented
Section 144 of the Patent Act directs the Federal Circuit to decide appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) by issuing “opinion[s].” 35 U.S.C. § 144. The word opinion is a legal term of art. It has long meant a court’s statement of reasons for a decision, and it is distinct from a judgment. Congress had also required the Federal Circuit’s predecessor to issue opinions in patent agency appeals. And it made sense for Congress to retain that reasoning-giving directive when it created the Federal Circuit: the court’s mandate was to clarify the legal standards for invention patents. Uncertainty stifles innovation. The Federal Circuit’s first Chief Judge, the Honorable Howard T. Markey, thus said: “In our Court there will be an opinion explaining enough to tell you what the law is in every case.” He added: “We do not just render a oneworded decision and go away.” In recent years, though, the Federal Circuit has routinely issued oneword “judgment[s] of affirmance without opinion” under Federal Circuit Rule 36(a), saying only “AFFIRMED” rather than issuing an opinion. That happened here. The PTAB invalidated claims in ParkerVision’s already issued patents through inter partes review, a peculiar process that flouts due-process principles; and the Federal Circuit summarily affirmed. So, ParkerVision has been deprived of vested property rights, yet no court has ever explained why, despite § 144’s text. The question presented is: Whether 35 U.S.C. § 144, which requires the Federal Circuit to issue “opinion[s]” in PTAB appeals, is a reason-giving directive that prohibits the Federal Circuit’s practice, under Federal Circuit Rule 36(a), of summarily affirming PTAB decisions without issuing opinions.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Amit Ramnik Vora
Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP
For respondent
David Chun
Ropes & Gray, LLP
Proceedings
- Mar 24 2025Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Harris Brumfield, Trustee for Ascent Trust GRANTED.
- Mar 24 2025Petition DENIED.
- Mar 05 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/21/2025.
- Feb 28 2025Reply of petitioner ParkerVision, Inc. filed.
- Feb 14 2025Brief of respondents TCL Industries Holdings Co. Ltd., et al. in opposition filed.
- Jan 15 2025Brief amici curiae of Association of Amicus Counsel, et al. filed.
- Jan 07 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 14, 2025, for all respondents.
- Jan 03 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 15, 2025 to February 14, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
- Dec 16 2024Response Requested. (Due January 15, 2025)
- Dec 11 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
- Dec 06 2024Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Harris Brumfield, Trustee for Ascent Trust.
- Dec 06 2024Brief amicus curiae of Island Intellectual Property LLC filed.
- Dec 06 2024Brief amici curiae of Association for American Innovation, et al. filed.
- Dec 06 2024Brief amicus curiae of Alliance of U.S. Startups and Inventors for Jobs filed.
- Dec 03 2024Brief amicus curiae of the Bar Association for the District of Columbia filed.
- Dec 02 2024Brief amici curiae of Phyllis Schlafly Eagles, et al. filed.
- Nov 25 2024Waiver of right of respondent LG Electronics, Inc. to respond filed.
- Nov 20 2024Brief amicus curiae of Injustice Pool, LLC filed.
- Nov 20 2024Brief amicus curiae of Fair Inventing Fund filed.
- Nov 14 2024Waiver of right of respondent TCL Industries Holdings Co., et al. to respond filed.
- Nov 04 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 6, 2024)
- Aug 28 2024Application (24A207) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until November 2, 2024.
- Aug 28 2024Application (24A208) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until November 2, 2024.
- Aug 24 2024Application (24A207) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 3, 2024 to November 2, 2024, submitted to The Chief Justice.
- Aug 24 2024Application (24A208) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 3, 2024 to November 2, 2024, submitted to The Chief Justice.