October Term 2014 · Docket 13-720
Can patent holders collect royalties after their patents expire?
Kimble argues that post-expiration royalties violate patent law. Marvel argues that such payments remain valid.
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
Kimble's counsel argued that Brulotte is a rule without a reason.
Kimble's counsel claimed that post-expiration royalties are often socially beneficial.
Marvel's counsel argued that Brulotte serves important public interests.
Marvel's counsel stated that Congress is the proper body to change the law.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 10-34 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 10-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 36-36 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 36-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 4-16 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 4-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-46 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 48-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 48-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 18-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 40-44 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 40-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 6-14 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 6-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 12-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 12-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 30-44 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 30-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 32-48 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 32-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 40-6
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether patent holders can demand payments for use after their patent terms end. The lower court ruled against Kimble. Kimble seeks to overturn that result. Marvel seeks to keep that result in place.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-46 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 18-42
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 31, 2015.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
What each side wants
Kimble wants the Court to ban post-expiration royalties.
Marvel wants the Court to allow post-expiration royalties.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-46 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 18-42
What each side says
Kimble argues that the Brulotte precedent is outdated and harmful.
Marvel argues that Brulotte remains correct and Congress should change the law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-46 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 18-42
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked what parties are doing now.
Justice Breyer asked how to reconcile long-term deals with limited patent terms.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 10-34 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 10-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 36-36 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 36-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 4-16 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 4-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 48-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 48-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 40-44 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 40-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 6-14 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 6-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 12-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 12-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 30-44 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 30-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 32-48 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 32-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 40-6
Why it matters
This dispute defines the boundary of patent rights. It affects how inventors and companies structure licensing deals. It determines whether patent holders can extend their financial control beyond the statutory term. It shapes the balance between private profit and public access to expired inventions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-46 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 18-42
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 10-34 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 10-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 36-36 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 36-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 4-16 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 4-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 48-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 48-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 40-44 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 40-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 6-14 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 6-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 12-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 12-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 30-44 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 30-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 32-48 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 32-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 40-6
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 24, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-46 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 18-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-46 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 18-42
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.