Peter v. NantKwest, Inc.
2019 United States Supreme Court opinion / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Peter v. NantKwest, Inc.?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Peter v. NantKwest Inc., 589 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case from the October 2019 term.
Peter v. NantKwest, Inc. | |
---|---|
Argued October 7, 2019 Decided December 11, 2019 | |
Full case name | Peter, Deputy Director, Patent and Trademark Office v. NantKwest, Inc. |
Docket no. | 18-801 |
Citations | 589 U.S. (more) 140 S. Ct. 365; 205 L. Ed. 2d 304 |
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
Case history | |
Prior |
|
Holding | |
USPTO cannot recover the salaries of its legal personnel under section 145 of the Patent Act. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | Sotomayor, joined by unanimous |
Laws applied | |
Section 145 of the Patent Act |
In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) was not entitled to be reimbursed for attorney's fees from patent applicants who file appeals against USPTO decisions.[1][2][3]
The case reinforced the application of the American rule, a default principle in United States law which states that, in a lawsuit, each party is responsible for paying its own attorney's fees unless there is a legal or contractual requirement that says otherwise.[4]
This case attracted attention from many intellectual property and law associations, many of whom (including the American Bar Association) filed friend-of-the-court briefs arguing against the government's request for attorney's fees from the plaintiff.[5][6]