The case of Cellspin Soft v. Fitbit has reached the Supreme Court, where it raises important questions about when federal judges must recuse themselves under 28 U.S.C. § 455. The case stems from Cellspin's patent infringement litigation, where after a judge granted summary judgment in favor of Fitbit, concerns were raised regarding the judge's potential conflicts of interest. These concerns were based on ties to Google and undisclosed investments. The outcome could significantly influence how recusal is assessed in future cases involving patent law.
Cellspin Soft v. Fitbit raises essential questions on judicial recusal standards, highlighting concerns over ties of judges to parties involved in patent litigation.
The petition urges the Supreme Court to clarify 28 U.S.C. § 455's recusal requirements and whether appellate courts should address recusal prior to merits.
Collection
[
|
...
]