Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.

Stanford v. Roche
Argued February 28, 2011
Decided June 6, 2011
Full case nameBoard of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, Petitioner v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., et al.
Docket no.09-1159
Citations563 U.S. 776 (more)
131 S. Ct. 2188; 180 L. Ed. 2d 1; 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4183; 79 U.S.L.W. 4407; 98 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1761; 68 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 617; 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 1069
Case history
Prior487 F. Supp. 2d 1099 (N.D. Cal. 2007); 563 F. Supp. 2d 1016 (N.D. Cal. 2008); affirmed in part, vacated in part, 583 F.3d 832 (Fed. Cir. 2009); cert. granted, 562 U.S. 1001 (2010).
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
MajorityRoberts, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan
ConcurrenceSotomayor
DissentBreyer, joined by Ginsburg
Laws applied
Bayh–Dole Act, 35 U.S.C. §§ 200212

Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., 563 U.S. 776 (2011), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that title in a patented invention vests first in the inventor, even if the inventor is a researcher at a federally funded lab subject to the 1980 Bayh–Dole Act.[1] The judges affirmed the common understanding of U.S. constitutional law that inventors originally own inventions they make, and contractual obligations to assign those rights to third parties are secondary.[2]

  1. ^ Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., 563 U.S. 776 (2011). Public domain This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
  2. ^ Baer MF, et al 9 Stanford v. Roche: Confirming The Basic Patent Law Principle That Inventors Ultimately Have Rights In Their Inventions les Nouvelles March 2012:19-23

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search