The article discusses how Xerox v. Facebook invokes Marbury v. Madison to challenge the PTAB's claim construction practices, questioning its adherence to Article III court rulings. Xerox argues that the PTAB's application of the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) undermines judicial principles, suggesting a potential violation of separation of powers. This case emphasizes the complex relationship between the PTAB's interpretations and the authority of district courts, especially following the USPTO's policy changes in interpreting patent claims, which may have significant implications for future patent law and administrative procedures.
In Xerox v. Facebook, the issue arises whether the PTAB must adhere to a district court's claim construction, highlighting tensions in separation of powers.
Xerox argues that the PTAB’s reliance on broadest reasonable interpretation undermines the judiciary’s authority, relying on Marbury v. Madison’s principles of judicial review.
Collection
[
|
...
]