Evideo Owners v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
Rule 12(b)(1), Subject-Matter Jurisdiction; RCFC 12(b)(6), Failure to State a Claim; Implied Contract; RCFC 9(k); Illegal Exaction; Fifth Amendment Due Process.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
LYDIA KAY GRIGGSBY, Judge
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs, assignees or owners of certain patent applications submitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USP-TO”), allege that the USPTO has violated the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution, breached certain implied-in-fact contracts with plaintiffs and illegally exacted certain fees from plaintiffs, by failing to inform plaintiffs…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Christy, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2019
- Evideo Incorporated v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
- Perry v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
- Virgin Islands Port Authority v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018