Cases compared
Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp. vs. Oklahoma v. United States vs. Mark Geraghty Wonders, Petitioner v. Office of the Army General Counsel
Administrative Law cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
No. 25-1230No. 25-1325No. 25-1423
Side by side
| Fact | Google LLC v. VirtaMove, Corp. | Oklahoma v. United States | Mark Geraghty Wonders, Petitioner v. Office of the Army General Counsel |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | 25-1230 | 25-1325 | 25-1423 |
| Status | Before Arguments | Before Arguments | Before Arguments |
| Date | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) |
| Question presented | 1. Whether the PTO retains statutory authority to deny institution based on the “settled expectations” factor, where discretion is committed to the PTO and no statutory provision prohibits consideration of settled expectations. 2. Whether the “drastic and extraordinary” remedy of mandamus is appropriate where Google identifies no statutory text that has been violated and the Federal Circuit has held that an alternative vehicle—a notice-and-comment rulemaking challenge—remains available. | Whether the Act’s delegation of law-enforcement and rulemaking power to the private Authority violates the Constitution’s private non-delegation doctrine? | 1. Did the Agency violate the law by disregarding a judge ’ s order and release only one of two legal reviews to the Petitioner in a security clearance hearing? 2. Did the Agency violate the law by misrepresenting the withheld legal review as a different Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") document, and completely redacting it, prior to submitting it to the Petitioner? 3. Did the Agency violate the law by denying the Petitioner ’ s subsequent 2012 and 2014 FOIA requests for the withheld legal review based upon claims of attorney-client privilege and FOIA protection not codified into the regulation until 2016? |
| Summary | Google asks the Court to review the Patent and Trademark Office’s policy of refusing to start certain inter partes reviews because a patent owner has “settled expectations” after the patent has been in force for six years. Google also challenges the Federal Circuit’s refusal to issue mandamus requiring the PTO to reconsider that policy. | Oklahoma and other petitioners ask the Supreme Court to review the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, which gives the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority significant rulemaking and enforcement duties over the horse-racing industry. They argue that Congress unconstitutionally gave governmental power to a private entity; the Sixth Circuit rejected that challenge. | Mark Geraghty Wonders asks the Supreme Court to review allegations that the Office of the Army General Counsel improperly withheld one of two legal reviews connected to his security-clearance matter. He argues that the agency failed to follow a judge’s order, mislabeled and redacted the withheld review under the Freedom of Information Act, and later relied on privileges or protections that were not added to the relevant regulation until 2016. |
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Administrative Law
- Why compared
- Reviewed Administrative Law tags connect these current-term public cases.
Related
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.