Skip to main content

No. 01-408October Term 2001Decided Jun 3, 2002

Docket 01-408October Term 2001 (2001–2002)

Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, Inc.

```json

Case status

Current stage
Decided
Latest event
Decision released Jun 3, 2002
Case Accepted
Arguments HeardMar 19, 2002
Decision ReleasedJun 3, 2002
What it's about

```json { "summary": "The Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit lacks jurisdiction over a case where the only patent law issues appear in a defendant's counterclaim rather than the plaintiff's original complaint. The decision reinforced the \"well-pleaded complaint rule,\" establishing that federal patent jurisdiction depends solely on the claims asserted by the plaintiff.", "questionPresented": "Does the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have appellate jurisdiction over a case in which the complaint does not allege a claim arising under federal patent law, but the answer contains a patent-law counterclaim?" } ```

Question presented

Does the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have appellate jurisdiction over a case in which the complaint does not allege a claim arising under federal patent law, but the answer contains a patent-law counterclaim?

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit / Decision released Jun 3, 2002

Area

Decided Supreme Court case

Documents

Opinions

Holmes Group

Scalia, Stevens, Ginsburg, O'Connor

View full docket on supremecourt.gov

Grounding

Grounding
Primary-source trail available.
Note
Plain-English explainer. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
Checked
Mar 30, 2026
Primary materials3