Arunachalam v. Intuit
In brief
The Supreme Court threw out the petition and denied Arunachalam’s request to proceed without paying filing fees; it did not decide her patent or constitutional claims.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · May 18, 2020
- What it’s about
- This case involves a petition for a writ of certiorari and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis filed by the petitioner, Lakshmi Arunachalam, following a decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
- Who it affects
- The order leaves Arunachalam’s challenges to the PTAB’s patent ruling and administrative patent judge appointments unresolved in the Supreme Court.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The filing raised three questions about patent-claim invalidation, constitutional protections, and the appointment of PTAB administrative patent judges.
Question presented
1. Whether the Federal Circuit’s Rule 36 summary affirmance of the PTAB’s decision, which invalidated Petitioner’s patent claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial? 2. Whether the PTAB’s retroactive application of the Alice/Mayo framework to invalidate previously issued patent claims violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment? 3. Whether the appointment of Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) to the PTAB violates the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution?
What the Court decided
Holding
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
- Result
- Dismissed
What's next
This Supreme Court docket action is finished. The Court did not decide the main legal questions in this petition.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Court Order added: Main Document
Show 3 moreShow fewer
Court Order added: Proof of Service
Opinion added: Arunachalam
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.