Sec. People, Inc. v. Iancu

2 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. PTAB Strategies and Insights - November 2021: Are Institution Decisions Set in Stone?

    Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.December 2, 2021

    [21] Id., at *6. [22] Sec. People, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 18-CV-06180-HSG, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 10, 2019). [23] Id., at *2.

  2. Security People, Inc. v. Iancu, 2019-2118, 2020 WL 4873762 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 20, 2020)

    Haug Partners LLPKiersten FowlerSeptember 2, 2020

    Thus, the APA alone cannot furnish the cause of action Security People asserted because 35 U.S.C. § 141 offers an adequate remedy for the constitutional claims at issue; “[a]llowing [patentees] to collaterally attack [IPR decisions] through suits under the APA would destroy the Patent Act’s careful framework for judicial review at the behest of particular persons through particular procedures.”41Sec. People, Inc. v. Iancu, 18-CV-06180-HSG, 2019 WL 2423510 (N.D. Cal. June 10, 2019), aff'd, 2019-2118, 2020 WL 4873762 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 20, 2020).2Sec. People, Inc. v. Iancu, 2019-2118, 2020 WL 4873762, at *2 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 20, 2020).3Id. at *4 (quoting Franklin v. Massachusetts, 505 U.S. 788, 797 (1992)).4Id. at *6 (quoting Pregis Corp. v. Kappos, 700 F.3d 1348, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2012)).