THE Oil States decision is irrevocable. It cannot be appealed. It's a done deal. This is a concept that scares patent maximalists, who are running out of tricks and strategies. No matter what they are trying, PTAB continues to attract more petitions over time. The maximalists haven't even been successful at slowing it down, e.g. with increase in fees (implemented under Matal). Seeing the maximalists squirm is enjoyable to us, having received threats from them over the years. They're bullies. They're vile.

"Seeing the maximalists squirm is enjoyable to us, having received threats from them over the years. They're bullies. They're vile."Two days ago Sanjeev Mahanta wrote for Watchtroll, which is nowadays looking for other, newer tricks for avoiding/bypassing PTAB. The patent "scam" of Allergan failed and SCOTUS ruled on Oil States in line with the US Constitution. PTAB is basically doing no wrong and it can carry on indefinitely; don't expect similar cases to be (re)visited by the Justices any time soon; it would be a waste of this court's time. They also touch nothing like Alice. There's no point. None. Alice was pretty clear about vagueness of particular patents. Mahanta's post is titled "Federal Circuit to decide if licensing agreement can prevent validity challenge at PTAB," but it seems like a very long shot and this court's decisions on patents are so many that whatever the outcome might be, it will have a 'shelf life' of just days if not weeks. On rare occasions these decisions are recalled for a few months. Then everyone forgets about them and moves on (not the case with Alice, Mayo, TC Heartland and so on).

We were actually amused to see that Watchtroll published 3 articles in just 5 hours about the Oil States decision. Yes, 3 article, all about the very same topic. They were in 'damage control' mode, looking to distort the narrative as early as possible. Seeing the totally incomprehensible mumbo jumbo that was going on inside their minds truly made our week. They just don't know what to do. They didn't know what to say. Steve Brachmann, who is neither technical nor legally-qualified (hired as merely a writer), said that the "Supreme Court Issues Much Anticipated Oil States and SAS Decisions" ("much anticipated" as in "everything is under control!"). This outcome was anticipated and expected, too.

"It's one thing to accuse judges of corruption (like secretly working for a defendant/plaintiff and sometimes accepting a bribe) but another thing altogether to bash judges for their views or facts-based decisions.""SCOTUS applied the public rights doctrine to the government’s grant of a patent, finding that patent validity trials need not take place in an Article III court nor did they violate the Seventh Amendment," Watchtroll wrote.

But that was not enough. Brachmann's 'master' (the site's founder) then jumped in. "While there has been much optimism due to the arrival of USPTO Director Andrei Iancu and his recent speeches signaling he understands the U.S. patent system must move along a different path, it is impossible to think that one man will be able to correct the collective mistakes of 535 elected Members of Congress and 9 ivy league educated jurists who seem convinced that forfeiting America's patent system is somehow what the Constitution demands," wrote a later article, implicitly casting the Supreme Court's decision as a "mistake".

It's one thing to accuse judges of corruption (like secretly working for a defendant/plaintiff and sometimes accepting a bribe) but another thing altogether to bash judges for their views or facts-based decisions. Watchtroll has quite a reputation for judge-bashing rhetoric, sometimes even demanding that judges step down or get fired. This is ugly.

"IPRs are formally constitutional, as per the US Constitution."A third article called the patent 'industry' (not a real industry) just "industry". It's a stack of self-serving quotes from the patent microcosm and patent aggressors. Hardly a reflection of views or consensus among the practicing (or producing) industry. Watchtroll‏ has already attacked the courts, so why not go further? On Wednesday Watchtroll published its latest anti-PTAB spin: "Despite Oil States, Inter Partes Review May Still Be Held Unconstitutional" (the exact opposite of what just happened).

Keep wishing, spin doctors. James Carmichael and Brad Close (in this particular case) were looking for loopholes, e.g.: "What was unfortunately never addressed in Oil States, and which the court specifically left the door open for, was that patents rights are still property rights for the purpose of Due Process–the inference being that IPRs may fail under the Due Process or Takings Clause."

So what do they intend to do? Appeal the decision of SCOTUS? They cannot. It's over. Case closed. IPRs are formally constitutional, as per the US Constitution. Get over it. ⬆