Law Center Search Results

The Supreme Court decided 6/3/02 that a defendant’s assertion of a patent law counterclaim does not grant the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (which has exclusive jurisdiction over patent appeals) appellate jurisdiction where the plaintiff’s complaint does not allege a claim arising under patent law. The Court recognized that the Federal Circuit is vested with exclusive appellate jurisdiction wherever the district court’s jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1338, which confers “original jurisdiction of any civil action arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents . . . .” Because Section 1338(a) uses the same “arising under” language as 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which confers general federal-question jurisdiction, the Court extended the “well-pleaded-complaint” rule to Section 1338. The Court held that “whether a case ‘arises under’ patent law ‘must be determined from what necessarily appears in the plaintiff’s statement of his own claim in the bill or declaration.’” (quoting Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 800, 808 (1988)). Thus, the Court’s decision clarifies that the “well-pleaded-complaint” rule applies to both Section 1331’s federal-question jurisdiction and Section 1338’s patent jurisdiction not only where the defendant raises a federal or patent-law-based defense (as dictated by the Court’s previous rulings), but also where the defendant brings a federal or patent-law-based counterclaim in response to litigation. This decision is important to all corporations that hold patent rights and/or litigate patent-related disputes.