Kappos v. Hyatt
Kappos v. Hyatt | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Argued January 9, 2012 Decided April 18, 2012 | |||||||
Full case name | David Kappos, Undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Gilbert P. Hyatt | ||||||
Docket nos. | 10-1219 | ||||||
Citations | |||||||
Argument | Oral argument | ||||||
Prior history | Decision against petitioner, unreported (BPAI 2001); summary judgement for defendant sub nom. Hyatt v. Dudas, 2006 WL 4606037 (D.D.C. 2005); affirmed sub nom. Hyatt v. Doll, 576 F.3d 1246 (Fed. Cir. 2009); vacated and remanded on en banc rehearing, 625 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2010); certiorari granted, 131 S.Ct. 3064 (2011) | ||||||
Holding | |||||||
There are no limitations on a plaintiff's ability to introduce new evidence in a §145 proceeding other than those in the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | |||||||
Court membership | |||||||
| |||||||
Case opinions | |||||||
Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan | ||||||
Concurrence | Sotomayor, joined by Breyer | ||||||
Laws applied | |||||||
35 U.S.C. § 145 |
Kappos v. Hyatt, 566 U.S. ___ (2012), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that there are no limitations on a plaintiff's ability to introduce new evidence in a §145 proceeding other than those in the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.[1]
See also
References
- ↑ Kappos v. Hyatt, No. 10-1219 (2012), Slip. Op. at 14
External links
- "Text of the decision from the United States Supreme Court" (PDF).
- Coverage of the case on SCOTUSblog
- Coverage of the case on Oyez
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/18/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.