Kappos v. Hyatt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Kappos v. Hyatt
Argued January 9, 2012
Decided April 18, 2012
Full case nameDavid Kappos, Undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Gilbert P. Hyatt
Docket no.10-1219
Citations566 U.S. 431 (more)
132 S. Ct. 1690; 182 L. Ed. 2d 704; 2012 U.S. LEXIS 3107; 80 U.S.L.W. 4333; 102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1337
ArgumentOral argument
Case history
PriorDecision 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
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
MajorityThomas, joined by unanimous
ConcurrenceSotomayor, joined by Breyer
Laws applied
35 U.S.C. § 145

Kappos v. Hyatt, 566 U.S. 431 (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] The petitioner in the case was David Kappos, who was then serving as Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Kappos v. Hyatt, No. 10-1219 (2012), Slip. Op. at 14

External links[edit]