In its June 20 ruling of Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee, the Supreme Court upheld the Obama Administration's Patent Office regulations and so doing, dealt a blow to the pharmaceutical industry, which held that the patent regulation "stifles innovation" in American medicine. The regulations were part of the 2011 congressional overhaul of the United States patent system, and at issue was the procedure for challenging patents through the procedure known as inter partes review, according to which patent challenges may be heard by an appeals board at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. While patents typically had been presumed to be valid, with the inter partes reviews that the Obama Administration established by rule, patents were more likely to be overturned. The Obama Administration's position was joined by generic drug companies and insurance plans that were alleging that drug companies had exploited the patent system to ensure higher drug prices, while the inter partes review standards would be both more likely to result in the patent's invalidation as well as a lowering of drug prices (though the case at hand did not deal specifically with prescription drugs, but rather GPS technology alerting drivers to whether they were speeding). The Court held that the Obama Administration was within its legal rights to impose this broader construction of patents in inter partes reviews.
Those standing to gain from the decision are technology companies that have used patent procedures to challenge the validity of patents seen as not making sufficient innovations, while the decision is seen as a setback for the pharmaceutical industry as well as biotechnology companies claiming that the rights of patent owners were being unfairly infringed upon. The unanimous decision was authored by Justice Breyer, though Justice Thomas authored a concurrence and Justice Alito (joined by Justice Sotomayor) filed a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. On the Patent Office's approach, Justice Breyer held that "in addition to helping resolve concrete patent-related disputes among parties, inter partes review helps protect the public’s 'paramount interest in seeing that patent monopolies.. are kept within their legitimate scope.'"
Those standing to gain from the decision are technology companies that have used patent procedures to challenge the validity of patents seen as not making sufficient innovations, while the decision is seen as a setback for the pharmaceutical industry as well as biotechnology companies claiming that the rights of patent owners were being unfairly infringed upon. The unanimous decision was authored by Justice Breyer, though Justice Thomas authored a concurrence and Justice Alito (joined by Justice Sotomayor) filed a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. On the Patent Office's approach, Justice Breyer held that "in addition to helping resolve concrete patent-related disputes among parties, inter partes review helps protect the public’s 'paramount interest in seeing that patent monopolies.. are kept within their legitimate scope.'"
RSS Feed