Opati v. Republic of Sudan
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Opati v. Republic of Sudan and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Opati v. Republic of Sudan.
The Supreme Court ruled that judicial review is precluded for the agency's application of the time limit set by Section 315(b) of the inter partes review process. This decision aligns with the Court's previous interpretation in Cuozzo, which bars review of matters closely tied to the institution decision. The ruling emphasizes the statutory design to efficiently eliminate invalid patent claims without unwarranted judicial interference.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Opati v. Republic of Sudan.
The Court held that Section 314(d) precludes judicial review of the agency's application of Section 315(b)'s time prescription.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Opati v. Republic of Sudan. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Opati v. Republic of Sudan
The case primarily involves the Court's interpretation of statutory limits on judicial review of agency decisions.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Section 314(d) precludes judicial review of the agency's application of § 315(b)'s time prescription.
-
Why Administrative Law is relevant to Opati v. Republic of Sudan
The case addresses the constitutional limits on agency authority and the non-reviewability of certain agency decisions.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)A party generally cannot contend on appeal that the agency should have refused 'to institute an inter partes review.'
-
Why Preemption is relevant to Opati v. Republic of Sudan
The case involves federal statutory provisions that override potential state law challenges to agency decisions.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The statute instead reflects a choice to entrust that issue to the agency.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Opati v. Republic of Sudan that support the summary and concepts above.
Section 314(d) precludes judicial review of the agency's application of § 315(b)'s time prescription.
A party generally cannot contend on appeal that the agency should have refused 'to institute an inter partes review.'
Allowing § 315(b) appeals would unwind agency proceedings determining patentability and leave bad patents enforceable.
