Kolya Glick
83 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 686
At the intersection of civil procedure and patent law lies the unique appellate
jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit. Congress granted the Federal Circuit
jurisdiction over patent law appeals in 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1) with the passage
of the Federal Courts Improvement Act in 1982. Since then, the Supreme
Court has interpreted this statute by imposing a variation of the well-pleaded
complaint rule onto patent law. Unfortunately, this interpretation has caused
a few problems in the Federal Circuit’s jurisprudence. First, it allows for jurisdiction
to exist in cases where no patent claims exist because they have been
rendered moot by settlement, dismissal, or motion. This aspect of the caselaw
fails to account for the inherent differences between appellate and original
jurisdiction. Second, it creates a complex and inconsistent analysis for litigants
and courts to wade through, which wastes valuable resources. Third,
under this rule, parties are able to manipulate appellate jurisdiction by modifying
the language of their settlement agreements. The America Invents Act
amended 28 U.S.C. § 1295 in 2011, but it did not directly address these
problems. Nonetheless, this Note argues that the amended version of the statute
should be read to support a repudiation of the well-pleaded complaint rule
in patent law. In its place, this Note asserts that jurisdiction should be assessed
based on the procedural posture of the case at the time of appeal rather than
the filing of the complaint, and jurisdiction should only lie in the Federal Circuit
when there is a live patent case or controversy.
