Fed Circuit denies stay in state sovereign immunity appeal
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has denied a motion to stay last month’s order that state sovereign immunity does not apply in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings.
State sovereign immunity is a legal doctrine whereby US states are considered to be sovereign entities which cannot be sued in court.
Last month, WIPR reported that the University of Minnesota (UMN), an arm of the state of Minnesota, had suffered a defeat before the Federal Circuit, which ruled that it could not rely on the doctrine in IPR proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
The dispute arose after UMN targeted LSI Corporation and Ericsson in a patent infringement lawsuit.
UMN claimed that Ericsson’s products, which featured semiconductors supplied by LSI, infringed six of its patents (US numbers 5,859,601; 7,251,768; 8,588,317; 8,718,185; 7,292,647; and 8,774,309).
In response, LSI and Ericsson petitioned for IPR, arguing that certain claims of the patents should be invalidated as obvious.
UMN claimed that its status as an arm of the state of Minnesota entitled it to state sovereign immunity before the PTAB, and called for the case to be dismissed.
The Federal Circuit, however, denied the request, upholding its previous precedent that sovereign immunity does not apply in IPR proceedings.
In last month’s ruling, the Federal Circuit cited its 2018 ruling in Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe v Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc, which held that tribal sovereign immunity did not apply in IPR proceedings.
UMN filed a motion to stay the judgment, pending an application to the Supreme Court for certiorari.
The Federal Circuit has now denied the motion, according to court documents filed yesterday, July 22.
In its motion, the university said that it intended to file a petition for certiorari by the September 12 deadline.
According to the university, a stay was appropriate given the likelihood of the Supreme Court granting certiorari.
“The question implicates two different subjects that the Supreme Court has repeatedly granted certiorari to address: (1) state sovereign immunity and (2) the proper scope and conduct of IPRs,” UMN argued.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today's top stories:
Philips says Fitbit ‘ignored’ licensing offers
