{"id":3748,"date":"2011-02-21T14:37:10","date_gmt":"2011-02-21T20:37:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=3748"},"modified":"2011-02-21T14:37:10","modified_gmt":"2011-02-21T20:37:10","slug":"sovereign-immunity-from-patent-infringement-for-indian-tribes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=3748","title":{"rendered":"Sovereign Immunity from Patent Infringement for Indian Tribes"},"content":{"rendered":"

One of the interesting cases that might be appealed to the Federal Circuit soon is Specialty House of Creation, Inc.\u00a0v. Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma<\/span>, 10-CV-371-GKF-TLW (N. D. Okla. Jan. 27, 2011).\u00a0 The case concerns whether an American Indian tribe can be sued for patent infringement if it has not consented to be sued.\u00a0 The judge in the Quapaw<\/span> case ruled in favor of the tribe and its assertion of lack of subject matter jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

The district court cited an earlier district court case\u00a0concerning patent infringement, Home Bingo Network v. Multimedia Games, Inc.<\/span>, 2005 WL 2098056 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2005), and a second circuit copyright case\u00a0 Bassett v. Mashantucket<\/em> Pequot Tribe<\/em>, 204 F.3d 343, 357-58 (2nd Cir. 2000)<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Interestingly, the district \u00a0court cited\u00a0 Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Manufacturing<\/em> Tech., Inc.<\/em>, 523 U.S. 751, 754 (1998)<\/span><\/a>\u00a0for the proposition that “[a]s a matter of federal law, an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity.”\u00a0 Id.<\/span>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The oral argument at the Supreme Court was argued by Federal Circuit nominee Edward DuMont.\u00a0 You can listen to that oral argument here: [Listen<\/a>][Read<\/a>].<\/p>\n

Sovereign immunity from patent infringement is an economically powerful asset.\u00a0 As Indian nations seek to provide good jobs for their tribe members, it will be interesting to see if any\u00a0attempt is made\u00a0to rely on this asset and how it might be done.\u00a0<\/p>\n

You can\u00a0read the Quapaw<\/span>\u00a0decision here: [Read<\/a>].<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

One of the interesting cases that might be appealed to the Federal Circuit soon is Specialty House of Creation, Inc.\u00a0v. Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma, 10-CV-371-GKF-TLW (N. D. Okla. Jan. 27, 2011).\u00a0 The case concerns whether an American Indian tribe can be sued for patent infringement if it has not consented to be sued.\u00a0 The judge […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3748"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3748"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3748\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3751,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3748\/revisions\/3751"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3748"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3748"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3748"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}