5 ms·
"While the Court will likely hear the remaining cases, which deal with finer points of patent law, its dismissal of Soverain speaks to the potential frivolousne
by motbob 13y ago
"While the Court will likely hear the remaining cases, which deal with finer points of patent law, its dismissal of Soverain speaks to the potential frivolousness of its claims."
I don't think this is accurate. The standard that the Supreme Court uses to decide whether to take cases is not "is this frivolous." Soverain v. Newegg would have to meet a pretty high standard in order to be granted appeal.
I think the author of this piece is reading into this denial way too much. The norm is for appeals to be denied. To be more precise, less than 5% of appeals were granted over a recent one year period. http://dailywrit.com/2013/01/likelihood-of-a-petition-being-granted/ http://dailywrit.com/2013/01/likelihood-of-a-petition-being-...
- ama729 13y agoFor those wondering why the total is closer to 1% (because of IFP) than 5% (paid), it's because the court is more frequently petitioned by prisoners with IFP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_forma_pauperis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_forma_pauperis
- venomsnake 13y agoWhat are the standards that SCOTUS uses except the obvious circuit split (having opposite laws in different parts of the country is obviously bad) for picking up a case?
- motbob 13y agoI don't think I can be more specific than to say that the case has to raise interesting questions. That is to say, I'm not sure.
- trothoun 13y agoThey also like cases that are purely questions of law, they tend to avoid cases that have unresolved questions of fact.
- michaelhoffman 13y agoThey don't really have standards for most of the sorts of cases that come up. It's really up to the justices' discretion. _Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme Court_ is a fascinating book that explains how the court decides to take some cases and not others, based on interviews with court insiders. http://www.amazon.com/Deciding-Decide-Agenda-Setting-Supreme/dp/0674194438 http://www.amazon.com/Deciding-Decide-Agenda-Setting-Supreme...
- rayiner 13y agoWhen the federal government appeals, the Supreme Court will more likely than not hear the case. Blatant conflict with prior Supreme Court precedent tends to increase the chances of the Supreme Court hearing a case. Decisions striking down acts of Congress are more likely to get heard. The Supreme Court also appears to try and "tidy up" areas of law by hearing a number of cases in a particular area in successive terms. For example, in 2004-2008, the Court heard Hamdi, Rasul, Hamdan, and Boumediene, all Guantanamo prisoner cases, in an effort to outline the rights of detainees. This article has a very thorough description of the cert process: http://www.mayerbrown.com/Certiorari-Practice-The-Supreme-Courts-Shrinking-Docket-06-12-1995/ http://www.mayerbrown.com/Certiorari-Practice-The-Supreme-Co...