Sign up for our free daily newsletter
YOUR PRIVACY - PLEASE READ CAREFULLY DATA PROTECTION STATEMENT
Below we explain how we will communicate with you. We set out how we use your data in our Privacy Policy.
Global City Media, and its associated brands will use the lawful basis of legitimate interests to use
the
contact details you have supplied to contact you regarding our publications, events, training,
reader
research, and other relevant information. We will always give you the option to opt out of our
marketing.
By clicking submit, you confirm that you understand and accept the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
The current case of Gunn v Minton involves a software manufacturer suing a group of Texas lawyers over an alleged mishandling of patent infringement action filed against the stock exchange, Nasdaq. The lawyers deny negligence, but the issue of whether the case should be heard at state or federal level has gone to the country’s highest court.
Inconsistency
According to a report in the National Law Journal, observers anticipate that the Supreme Court justices will side with the federal courts, with the report maintaining the judges are concerned that US state court decisions in patent negligence cases would bring ‘inconsistency to federal law’. It is also suggested that the justices fear that inconsistency would then spread to other areas, such as immigration and competition law.
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts Jr is reported as having concerns that if state courts had jurisdiction over the area, it ‘would be disruptive of the uniformity of federal patent law’.
The Supreme Court hearing continues in the matter.
Email your news and story ideas to: [email protected]