Federal Circuit Jumps Into Tribal Immunity Controversy
The D.C.-based appellate court on Wednesday stopped a PTAB proceeding in which the board has declined to recognize the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe's sovereign immunity.
March 28, 2018 at 09:54 PM
3 minute read
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has stepped into the debate over tribal sovereign immunity at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
The D.C.-based appellate court on Wednesday stopped a PTAB proceeding in which the board has declined to recognize the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe's sovereign immunity. The Federal Circuit scheduled a June hearing on the tribe's bid to dismiss the proceedings, in which generic pharmaceutical companies challenge the validity of patents on Allergan's Restasis dry eye medication.
Allergan assigned its patents to the tribe last summer in exchange for $15 million. The tribe then asserted its sovereign immunity before the PTAB, arguing that should end the inter partes review proceedings. The move generated a storm of controversy, including congressional hearings and at least two legislative proposals to block such arrangements.
➤➤ Get IP news and commentary straight to your in-box with Scott Graham's email briefing, Skilled in the Art. Learn more and sign up here.
The PTAB ruled earlier this year that tribal immunity doesn't apply to IPR proceedings, and that even if it did, Allergan is still the effective owner of the patents and can proceed without the tribe. “Based on the record before us, we find that the tribe has not retained anything more than an illusory or superficial right to sue for infringement of the challenged patents,” the PTAB order stated. It set an April 3 hearing to decide the validity of the patents.
The tribe and Allergan jointly sought an immediate appeal to the Federal Circuit. Saint Regis counsel Shore Chan DePumpo argued that the PTAB is creating “ad hoc rules and new forms of PTAB standing through board decisions to facilitate what it perceives to be its mission as the gatekeeper of what is patentable.”
Perkins Coie; Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati; Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox; and Sughrue Mion represent PTAB petitioners Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Akorn Inc. They argue that Allergan and the tribe waited until just before the oral hearing last September to assert the tribe's immunity, which took nearly six months to decide. The Federal Circuit appeal is “the latest step in their elaborate and unprecedented effort” to draw out the PTAB proceedings and prolong Allergan's monopoly on Restasis, they told the court. The appeals should be decided after the PTAB issues its final written decision, they said.
The Federal Circuit issued two brief, unsigned orders Wednesday. The court said that “at this juncture, it appears” that exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the immunity lies with the Federal Circuit, and that the PTAB proceedings would be stayed at least until the June hearing.
Shore Chan partner Michael Shore welcomed the news. “We are pleased Article III judges will decide the application of tribal immunity,” he said, “as opposed to APJs who have no knowledge, background or experience with such an important issue.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFTC Sues PepsiCo for Alleged Price Break to Big-Box Retailer, Incurs Holyoak's Wrath
5 minute readSupreme Court Will Hear Religious Parents' Bid to Opt Out of LGBTQ-Themed School Books
Wells Fargo and Bank of America Agree to Pay Combined $60 Million to Settle SEC Probe
Trending Stories
- 1Relaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
- 2Reviewing Judge Merchan's Unconditional Discharge
- 3With New Civil Jury Selection Rule, Litigants Should Carefully Weigh Waiver Risks
- 4Young Lawyers Become Old(er) Lawyers
- 5Caught In the In Between: A Legal Roadmap for the Sandwich Generation
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250