is a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group. His practice focuses on patent litigation in the United States District Courts and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, with a particular emphasis on cases arising under the Hatch-Waxman Act. He has extensive experience briefing and arguing both Federal Circuit appeals and complex motions in district-court patent litigation.
For more information or to contact William, please visit his Firm Profile Page.
On Wednesday, April 21, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., which concerns the doctrine of assignor estoppel. Generally speaking, assignor estoppel prohibits the assignor of a patent from later attacking the patent’s validity in court. Minerva argues that assignor estoppel is an ill-conceived relic of a bygone era that the Court should discard or at least substantially limit. Hologic argues that the doctrine is a bedrock part of the common law—a background against which Congress has been legislating for over a century—that the Court should preserve in full.
Capella Photonics, Inc. has filed a petition for certiorari arguing that the Federal Circuit’s practice of issuing judgments without opinion pursuant to Federal Circuit Rule 36 in appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board violates 35 U.S.C. § 144, which provides that the Federal Circuit “shall issue . . . its mandate and opinion” to the PTO in such appeals.