The Supreme Court is considering whether to review ParkerVision and Island IP cases concerning the Federal Circuit's use of one-word 'AFFIRMED' judgments under Rule 36. ParkerVision argues this practice violates 35 U.S.C. § 144, which mandates the issuance of a detailed opinion when deciding PTAB appeals. Notably, the opposition from TCL did not dispute this statutory interpretation, indicating a potential weakness in their argument against ParkerVision's claims. This legal debate emphasizes the importance of judicial transparency and thorough reasoning in appellate decisions.
ParkerVision argues that the Federal Circuit, under 35 U.S.C. § 144, is mandated to provide an 'opinion' in its judgments, challenging the use of one-word affirmances.
The opposition from TCL showed a remarkable lack of engagement with the core issue of statutory interpretation, failing to contest the requirement for an 'opinion'.
Collection
[
|
...
]