SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu
United States Supreme Court
138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018)
- Written by Eric Cervone, LLM
Facts
SAS Institute, Inc. (SAS) (plaintiff) sought an inter partes review of a software patent owned by ComplementSoft. SAS alleged that all 13 of the patent’s claims were unpatentable. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the board) (defendant) instituted review on only some claims and denied review on the rest. The board argued that it had the authority to conduct a partial review based on a regulation enacted by the Patent Office. The board claimed that although it may have had to decide every claim challenged by SAS, the board was not required to bring every claim into the review process. The board argued that because the statutory language required it to evaluate claims individually, it was also entitled to institute review on a claim-by-claim basis. SAS sought review in the Federal Circuit, arguing that 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) required the board to decide the patentability of every claim SAS challenged in its petition. The Federal Circuit rejected SAS’s argument. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gorsuch, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
