October Term 2011 · Docket 10-1219
Does new evidence require a patent applicant to sue in the Court of Appeals?
The dispute centers on whether a patent applicant must file suit in the Court of Appeals when presenting new evidence to challenge a denial.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Ms. Anders argued Section 145 permits district court review.
She stated applicants can seek judicial review of agency denials.
Justice Sotomayor questioned the substance of the new evidence.
She asked what content constituted new evidence beyond form.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-47 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-17
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The Supreme Court reviews a lower court decision. The case involves a patent applicant and the Patent and Trademark Office. The core issue is the proper venue for judicial review.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-47 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 9, 2012.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to affirm the district court's jurisdiction.
the opposing side wants the Court to require appellate review for new evidence.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-47 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues Section 145 allows district court review of agency denials.
the opposing side argues new evidence mandates review by the Court of Appeals.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-47 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the Morgan case involved an interference proceeding.
Justice Sotomayor asked about the connection between the district and circuit holdings.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-17
Why it matters
This case defines the path for challenging patent denials. It determines where applicants must file suit. It clarifies the role of new evidence in litigation. It shapes the balance between agency and judicial power.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-47 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-17
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-47 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-47 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-15
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.