Venue Panel Nimalka Wickramasekera Winston amp Strawn LLP 2 Sovereign Immunity amp Patent Litigation Who can assert States amp arms of the state eg state universities state agencies in certain ID: 746640
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "ADVANCED PATENT LAW INSTITUTE" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
ADVANCED PATENT LAW INSTITUTEVenue Panel
Nimalka Wickramasekera, Winston & Strawn LLPSlide2
2
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Who can assert:
States & arms
of the state (e.g., state universities, state agencies in certain circumstances)McCullogh v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 350-51 (1819) Effect:In patent context, Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity from suits for patent infringement & declaratory judgment of invalidity or noninfringementWaiver:State may expressly waive sovereign immunity from suitState voluntarily becomes party to a cause and submits its rights for judicial determinationGunter v. Atl. Coast Line R.R., 200 U.S. 273, 284 (1906)
The Eleventh AmendmentSlide3
3
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Unique
political entities: not a foreign nation and not a state
Subject to the plenary control of Congress“It is fundamentally Congress’s job, [not Article III courts], to determine whether or how to limit tribal immunity. The special brand of sovereignty the tribes retain—both in its nature and its extent—rests in the hands of Congress.”Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Comty., 134 S.Ct. 2024, 2037 (2014) Sovereign Immunity & Indian TribesSlide4
4
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does sovereign immunity apply to suits brought
by
states? No.Regents of the Univ. of California v. Eli Lilly and Co., 119 F.3d 1559 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Regents of Univ. of California, 964 F.2d 1128, 1133 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Federal Circuit ruled that: “We discern no principle of state sovereign immunity slighted by the Multidistrict Panel’s order. Principles of federalism are not compromised by this result.” Regents of Univ. of California, 964 F.2d at 1133.“The Eleventh Amendment applies to suits ‘against’ a state, not suits by a state.”
Regents of the
Univ.
of California v. Eli Lilly and
Co.
, 119
F.3d 1559 (1997).
State Sovereign Immunity – Patent Venue and Jurisdiction Slide5
5
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does
sovereign immunity apply to compulsory counterclaims
? No.Regents of Univ. of New Mexico v. Knight, 321 F.3d 1111 (Fed. Cir. 2003).State university sued inventors in federal court, seeking declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief on patent and state law claims and the defendants counterclaimed On appeal, Federal Circuit upheld summary judgment that university is owner of patents, but affirmed counterclaim for royalties because they arose from the same transaction as contract giving university patent ownership “[C]ompulsory counterclaims, while being limited to those that arise from the same transaction or occurrence, allow for adjudication of counterclaims that are not strictly of the ‘same kind or nature,’ but should be ligated together.” Id
. at 1125.
State Sovereign Immunity – Patent Venue and Jurisdiction Slide6
6
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does state sovereign immunity apply to IPRs?
According to PTAB, yes
.Covidien LP, v. Univ. of Florida Research Found. Inc., IPR2016-01274-76, Paper 21 (PTAB Jan. 25, 2017). PTAB held state university was entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity defense to the institution of an inter partes review (IPR)“On the whole, considering the nature of inter partes review and civil litigation, we conclude that the considerable resemblance between the two is sufficient to implicate the immunity afforded to the States by the Eleventh Amendment.” (Id. at 24.) The Board further stated:“[W]e are not persuaded that an inter partes review is an in rem action directed only to the patent and not against the patent owner.” (Id. at 13.)“[W]e are not persuaded that an inter partes review is an action brought by the federal government against a state.” (Id. at 16.)
State Sovereign Immunity – IPRsSlide7
7
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does tribal sovereign immunity apply to IPRs?
TBD
. Mylan Pharm. Inc., et al., v. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, IPR2016-01127-32 (PTAB).One month after IPR filed against six Orange Book-listed patents for Restasis®, Allergan, Inc. assigned patents to St. Regis Mohawk TribeAllergan licensed back patents for $13.75 million upfront and $15 million in annual royalties while patents remained validIPR Timeline:June 3, 2015 – Mylan filed six petitions for inter partes review (additional petitions filed by Teva and Akorn)December 8, 2016 – PTAB instituted IPR September 8, 2017 – Allergan assigned patents to Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe September 22, 2017 – Saint Regis Tribe moved to dismiss IPR
petition
October
13, 2017 –
Petitioners
submitted oppositions to
dismissal
December
1, 2017 – Amicus Curiae submitted briefs to address Tribal Sovereign
Immunity
Tribal Sovereign Immunity – IPRsSlide8
8
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does tribal sovereign immunity apply to IPRs?
TBD
. Mylan Pharm. Inc., et al., v. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Cont.St. Regis Tribe arguments: Tribe’s sovereign immunity applies to inter partes review proceedings, just as it does to other adjudicatory proceedingsAs a sovereign, it cannot be sued unless:Congress unequivocally abrogates its immunity; or Tribe expressly waives it IPR cannot proceed without Tribe because it is an indispensable party as new owner of the patents
Tribal Sovereign Immunity – IPRsSlide9
9
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does tribal sovereign immunity apply to IPRs?
TBD
. Mylan Pharm. Inc., et al., v. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Cont.Petitioners’ arguments: A “sham” assignment cannot subvert a cornerstone of patent reform . . .threaten[ing] not just these IPRs, but the integrity of the patent system, encouraging others to follow the same business plan.” Even if Tribe is not an indispensable party:Allergan adequately represents all interests in the patentsBoard can afford complete relief among existing parties without Tribe’s presenceNo risk of inconsistent obligations because patentability is sole issueIPRs are not subject to tribal immunity because Board:Simply reviews compliance with patent lawsDoes not compel parties to actCan enter judgment without party participationBoard, as a statutory creature, only has authority to act under its enabling statute with no power to determine or abrogate sovereign immunity
Tribal Sovereign Immunity – IPRsSlide10
10
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does tribal sovereign immunity apply to IPRs?
TBD.
Mylan Pharm. Inc., et al., v. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Cont.15 Amicus Curiae briefs submitted to the PTABThose in support of the Tribe argue, inter alia, that:The assignment from Allergan to the Tribe is a legitimate transfer of patent rightsPTAB has no authority to control or determine the availability of sovereign immunity Participation in the patent system does not constitute a waiver of tribal sovereign immunity
Tribal Sovereign Immunity – IPRsSlide11
11
Sovereign Immunity & Patent Litigation
Does tribal sovereign immunity apply to IPRs?
TBD.
Mylan Pharm. Inc., et al., v. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Cont.Those in support of the Petitioners argued, inter alia, that:Tribe cannot impose sovereign immunity against the United States and tribes must comply with statues of general applicability Tribal sovereign immunity is not applicable to IPRsPTAB only has jurisdiction over patents, not Patent Owner Sovereign immunity should not be allowed to impact PTAB’s duty to protect public’s interest in seeing that patent monopolies are kept within their legitimate scope
Tribal Sovereign Immunity – IPRsSlide12
Questions