County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund 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 County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund.
The Supreme Court ruled that judicial review is precluded for the agency's application of the time prescription under § 315(b) of the inter partes review process. This decision reinforces the statute's purpose to efficiently eliminate invalid patent claims by preventing appeals that could reverse agency determinations of patentability. The Court emphasized that § 314(d) bars review of matters closely tied to the institution decision.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund.
The Court held that § 314(d) precludes judicial review of the agency's application of § 315(b)'s time prescription.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund
The case centers on whether the Court can review the agency's decision to institute inter partes review, which involves the power of courts to review and invalidate government action.
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 County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund
The case involves constitutional limits on agency authority, specifically 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 County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund
The decision discusses the preclusion of judicial review of agency decisions, which can be seen as a form of federal law overriding potential state law claims.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Allowing § 315(b) appeals, however, would unwind agency proceedings determining patentability and leave bad patents enforceable.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund 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 § 315(b) challenge easily meets that measurement."
"Congress designed inter partes review to weed out bad patent claims efficiently."
