Date of Award

2018

Degree Type

Open Access Thesis

Document Type

Master Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Public Administration (MPA)

Department

Government

Department Name when Degree Awarded

Government and Economics

First Advisor

Anne M. Cizmar

Department Affiliation

Government and Economics

Second Advisor

LeAnn Beaty

Department Affiliation

Government and Economics

Third Advisor

Matthew L. Howell

Department Affiliation

Government and Economics

Abstract

For 400 years, courts have adjudicated disputes between private parties about the validity of patents. Inventors apply for patents to an administrative agency. Patent examiners review the application to determine whether or not an idea is valid to have a patent issued. Patent examiners are people and sometimes errors are made. An administrative agency must have an administrative avenue to review a potential error. Six years ago, Congress created a review with the implementation of inter parte reviews. An argument before the U.S. Supreme Court looks at whether or not Inter partes review violate Article III of the U.S. Constitution. A case analysis of Oil States v. Green's Energy Group, et al. will show that more likely than not correcting an error of an administrative agency is not in violation of one's constitutional right to a jury. Permitting the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to correct its own errors in light of subsequent clarifications in the law allows for an efficient course-correction that improves the quality of individual patents and benefits the patent system generally.

Download

Share

COinS