In June, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to rule on whether inter partes review, an often-used administrative process for determining patent validity, is unconstitutional. Months later, in-house counsel have begun lending their names to amicus briefs in what's sure to be a closely watched case, as it stands to significantly impact the patent system.

The case, Oil States Energy Services v. Greene's Energy Group, likely to be argued in the high court's next term, questions whether the IPR process violates the Constitution by eliminating a private property right without the option of a jury trial. Texas-based Oil States Energy Services has argued that “[s]uits to invalidate patents must be tried before a jury in an Article III forum, not in an agency proceeding.”

Meanwhile, Greene's Energy Group has called IPR “the sort of mechanism that Congress may permissibly create to administer a public-right scheme.”