Teles Ag v. Kappos

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the AIPA and prior versions of the amendments were intended to streamline the reexamination process as a viable alternative to infringement litigation
• “[t]he logic of Joy Technologies, construing “patent applicants” to include “patent owners,” is no longer applicable because the plain meaning of section 145 indicates otherwise”
• “[T]he 1999 amendments, which for the first time revised sections 134 and 141 to specifically refer to the rights of patent owners, as opposed to patent applicants, while restricting coverage of section 145 to patent applicants, removed this Court’s jurisdiction to hear the plaintiffs’ claims”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).