SCOTUS to review Postal Service patent case

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

SCOTUS to review Postal Service patent case

US Supreme Court Joao 168

Cert granted in Return Mail v United States Postal Service, which asks whether the government is a "person" who may petition to institute review proceedings under the AIA

US Surpreme Court Joao

The Supreme Court yesterday granted cert to Return Mail v United States Postal Service. In this case, an Alabama company accused the Postal Service of improperly convincing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to cancel its patent for a mail processing system.

The court granted cert to only the firstquestion presented, which is: “Whether the government is a 'person' who may petition to institute review proceedings under the AIA.”

John O’Quinn, partner at Kirkland & Ellis, commented: “The Court is once again taking a case to work through statutory interpretation questions in the AIA.

“In this case, the Court is confronted with the meaning of the term ‘person’, which can be fairly broad.  However, the question is really whether one agency of the government can be in the business of challenging whether another agency of the government erred in issuing a patent -- if one federal agency and another disagree, they normally do not litigate over it.  So it’s against that backdrop that the Supreme Court has to interpret the meaning of ‘person’.”

Ropes & Gray IP litigation attorneys Scott McKeown and Matt Rizzolo commented in a statement: “It’s worth noting that Supreme Court’s grant in Return Mail bears an interesting resemblance to how SAS Institute v Iancu, decided this past term, found its way to the Court – with Judge Newman dissenting from the Federal Circuit’s opinion on a discrete issue of statutory interpretation, followed by a successful cert petition on that same issue.”

This is the fourth IP case the Supreme Court has taken on this term, making it two patent cases and two copyright cases.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article