U.S. Gov’t Unconstitutionally Cancels Patents, Class Action Claims

An Oklahoma company says that the U.S. government unfairly pulls patents in violation of the Constitution in a new class action lawsuit.

The company, Christy’s Inc., who say they hold a patent on a vacuum cleaner, alleges that the U.S. government yanked patent rights from putative Class Members by finding patents invalid under a review process implemented by the America Invents Act (AIA).

The class action lawsuit alleges that the AIA violates the takings clause of the U.S. Constitution by taking private property rights without fair compensation.

“Having a patent issued in your favor in the United States is a birthright for many inventors and business owners in the United States,” alleges the class action lawsuit. “The patent itself serves multiple purposes, including, among others, serving as (1) validation that the subject invention is worthy of protection in the United States, (2) a property right with the ability to exclude others from using the subject inventions, (3) and protection that allows an inventor and patent owner to invest in the subject inventions with knowledge that the investment is protected from use by others, which is a stated policy underlying the grant of a patent. Once a patent is issued by the [United States Patent and Trademark Office], it is presumed valid by statute.”

According to the class action lawsuit, Christy’s held a patent on a vacuum cleaner that was challenged by Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. Their patent was declared invalid by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board under the AIA.

The AIA enacted Patent Trial and Appeal review of patent challenges in 2011. The reviews were enacted to lessen the burden and expense of trial court proceedings. The AIA has come under fire over allegations that it violates the right to a trial by jury as well as protection from unconstitutional takings under the Fifth Amendment.

“This taking was effectuated by the United States Patent and Trademark Office [USPTO]…and by the alleged authority of recently created post-grant proceedings of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (‘AIA’),” states the class action lawsuit. “The USPTO’s invalidation of the Plaintiff’s and Class member’s patent claims was a taking without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.”

The plaintiff says that they and others suffer millions in uncompensated loses at the hands of the U.S. government under AIA proceedings.

“Somebody must be held responsible for decimating these duly issued patent rights through [inter partes reviews] and these other post-grant AIA proceedings,” an attorney for Christy’s told Law360. “Since the government is the one that claims to have created this whole mess in the first place, then it should be the one that has to pay.”

The plaintiff is seeking damages, including compensation for lost royalty fees and revenues from allegedly unlawfully invalidated patents. Inventors also lose out on resources invested in developing the patents that get invalidated as a result of the AIA process, alleges the class action lawsuit, along with expensive attorney fees used to fight the invalidation of the patents.

Christy is represented by James McDonough III, Jonathan R. Miller, Travis E. Lynch, Timothy C. Davis, W. Lewis Garrison Jr., Christopher B. Hood and Anna M. Carroll of Heninger Garrison Davis LLC.

The U.S. Patent Class Action Lawsuit is Christy Inc. v. United States of America, Case No. 18­-657, in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.