Decided
Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.
Holding
The Bayh-Dole Act does not automatically vest title to federally funded inventions in federal contractors or authorize contractors to unilaterally take title to such inventions.
Plain English Holding
The right to patent an invention ordinarily belongs to the person who created the invention, rather than to the inventor’s employer (unless the employer and employee agree otherwise). That rule does not change simply because the invention was created with the assistance of federal funding.
Judgment
Affirmed, 7-2, in an opinion by John Roberts on Jun 6, 2011. Justice Sotomayor joined the Court’s opinion but also filed a concurring opinion; Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Ginsburg.
Merits Briefs
- Brief of Petitioner Board of Trustees of Stanford University
- Brief for Respondents Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.
- Reply Brief of the Petitioner Board of Trustees of Stanford University
Amicus Briefs
- Brief for Birch Bayh in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for John Sutton Suggesting Reversal
- Brief for American Intellectual Property Law Association in Support of Neither Party
- Brief for the United States in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for Bayhdole25, Inc., in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for Association of American Universities, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Council on Education, Association of American Medical Colleges, Association of Independent Research Institutes, Association of Public and Landgrant Universities, the Association of University Technology Managers, Council on Governmental Relations, In Support of Petitioner
- Brief for Alexander M. Shukh, PH.D. in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for Intellectual Property Owners Association in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Intel Corporation, Eli Lilly and Company, Johnson and Johnson, Life Technologies Corporation, Pfizer, Inc., and SAP America, Inc. in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Biotechnology Industry Organization in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the American Association of University Professors, IEEE-USA, and IP Advocate in Support of Affirmance
[##CERT-STAGE##]
Related Coverage
Mar 22, 2010Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 26, 2010)
Apr 21, 2010Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 26, 2010.
Apr 23, 2010Brief amici curiae of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, et al. filed.
Apr 26, 2010Brief amici curiae of Association of American Universities, et al. filed.
Apr 26, 2010Brief amicus curiae of Massachusetts Institute of Technology filed.
May 26, 2010Brief of respondents Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.
Jun 5, 2010Reply of petitioner Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University filed. (Distributed)
Jun 8, 2010DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 24, 2010.
Jun 28, 2010The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.
Sep 28, 2010Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.
Oct 12, 2010Supplemental brief of respondents Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., et al. filed.
Oct 13, 2010DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 29, 2010.
Nov 1, 2010Petition GRANTED.
Dec 3, 2010Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the peititoner
Dec 6, 2010Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondents.
Dec 16, 2010Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
Dec 16, 2010Brief of petitioner Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University filed.
Dec 16, 2010Supplemental joint appendix filed.
Dec 21, 2010The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including January 25, 2011.
Dec 21, 2010Brief amicus curiae of Alexander M. Shukh, Ph.D. filed.
Dec 23, 2010SET FOR ARGUMENT Monday, February 28, 2011.
Dec 23, 2010Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.
Dec 23, 2010Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association filed.
Dec 23, 2010Brief amicus curiae of National Venture Capital Association filed.
Dec 23, 2010Brief amicus curiae of BayhDole25, Inc. filed.
Dec 23, 2010Brief amicus curiae of Birch Bayh filed.
Dec 23, 2010Brief amicus curiae of John Sutton filed.
Dec 23, 2010Brief amici curiae of Association of American Universities, et al. filed.
Jan 7, 2011CIRCULATED.
Jan 20, 2011Record received from U.S.C.A. for Federal Circuit. (1 box)
Jan 24, 2011Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.
Jan 25, 2011Brief of respondents Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., et al. filed.
Feb 1, 2011Lodging request received from counsel for the respondents.
Feb 1, 2011Brief amici curiae of American Association of University Professors, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Feb 1, 2011Brief amici curiae of Intel Corporation, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Feb 1, 2011Brief amicus curiae of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America filed. (Distributed)
Feb 1, 2011Brief amicus curiae of Biotechnology Industry Organization filed. (Distributed)
Feb 1, 2011Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed. (Distributed)
Feb 14, 2011Reply of petitioner Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University filed. (Distributed)
Feb 18, 2011Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.
Feb 28, 2011Argued. For petitioner: Donald B. Ayer, Washington, D. C.; and Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Mark C. Fleming, Boston, Mass.
Jun 6, 2011Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a concurring opinion. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined.
Jul 8, 2011JUDGMENT ISSUED.
Jul 27, 2011Record returned to U.S.C.A. for Federal Circuit.
Recommended Citation: Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/board-of-trustees-of-the-leland-stanford-junior-university-v-roche-molecular-systems-inc/