Skip to main content
· 4/10/2015

Automated Merchandising Systems, Inc. v. Lee

Citations

  • 782 F.3d 1376
  • 114 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1457
  • 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5801
  • 2015 WL 1600058

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding agency deci- sion to initiate or continue proceedings cannot be reviewed until there is a final agency determination
  • holding agency deci- sion to initiate or continue proceedings cannot be reviewed until there is a final agency determination
  • adopting the Government’s argument that even a deci- sion to continue a proceeding is not a final agency action, which generally will occur only upon conclusion of the proceeding
  • denying petition seeking to terminate ongoing reexamination due to “adequate rem- edy” of an appeal
  • finding no final agency action in a suit challenging the PTO’s refusal to terminate reexamina- tion proceedings despite the request of the patent owner
  • denying petition seeking to ter- minate ongoing reexamination due to “adequate remedy” of an appeal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Prost, Taranto, Fogel

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.