Judicial Advocacy

AIPLA files amicus briefs in cases that are important to its members, following a long tradition of judicial advocacy. Those briefs are accessible by clicking the relevant year of the case in the navigation column on the left side of this page.

The AIPLA Amicus Committee receives many requests from parties in litigation for the Association's amicus support, and the Committee considers and recommends to the Board of Directors the best cases for AIPLA to join and urge its positions on the cutting-edge issues of the law. Although AIPLA welcomes the views of the parties to the dispute, the AIPLA amicus positions are the product of independent consideration by the Committee and the Board of Directors, based on the law and their understanding of policy and legal questions in dispute.



Interested in Requesting AIPLA Consideration for Amicus Support?

For more information on how to request AIPLA's consideration for amicus support and to learn more about the process, please click HERE.

Learn More About the Amicus Committee Leadership


For information about the Amicus Committee and it's current leadership, please click HERE.

Click the tabs below to explore some of AIPLA's judicial advocacy:

2024
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in REGENXBIO Inc. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.

    May 14, 2024

    Arlington, VA. May 10, 2024 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief in support of neither party with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in REGENXBIO Inc. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc., a case on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The district court held that cultured host cells containing a recombinant nucleic acid molecule were not eligible for patent protection under Section 101 of the Patent Act because the individual nucleic acid sequences used in the recombinant molecule were not modified or changed from their naturally occurring state.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc.

    March 21, 2024

    Arlington, VA. February 29, 2024 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief in support of neither party with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc., a case on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The district court held that the post-GATT patents-in-suit are unenforceable under the doctrine of prosecution laches and found unreasonable and inexcusable delay where 13 years had elapsed between the provisional patent application and presenting the claims at issue.
2023
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Warner Chappell Music, Inc., et al. v. Sherman Nealy, et al.

    December 7, 2023

    Arlington, VA. December 7, 2023 - the American Intellectual Property Law Association filed an amicus brief in support of neither party to the Supreme Court in Warner Chappell Music, Inc., et al. v. Sherman Nealy, et al. on the issue of whether the Copyright Act's statute of limitations imposes a three-year limit on the lookback period for damages in copyright ownership disputes applying the discovery rule.
  • AIPLA Filed Amicus Brief with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re: Cellect, LLC

    November 29, 2023

    Arlington, VA. November 22, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re: Cellect, LLC. in support of a petition for rehearing en banc.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in The TriZetto Group, Inc. v. Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited

    October 24, 2023

    On October 18, 2023, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief in support of a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court in The TriZetto Group, Inc. v. Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Limited (23-306) on the issue of whether unjust enrichment damages in a trade secret case should be considered independently of the victim’s own loss.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief with Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re: Xencor, Inc.

    October 16, 2023

    On October 6, 2023, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re: Xencor, Inc., a case on appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The case concerns the Board’s rejection of patent claims directed to a treatment method involving administration of an antibody containing certain amino acid substitutions that increase the antibody’s half-life. The Board rejected the claims for lack of written description and as indefinite.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief with Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC

    September 5, 2023

    Arlington, VA. August 29, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in support of neither party in LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, a case that the Federal Circuit agreed to rehear en banc in June 2023. The case concerns the test for obviousness for design patents and whether the Supreme Court’s decision in KSR (which involved a utility patent) overrules or abrogates the current Rosen-Durling framework.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Vidal v. Elster

    August 2, 2023

    Arlington, VA. August 2, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) argued in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) refusal to register the trademark “Trump Too Small” violated the applicant’s First Amendment right to criticize government officials or public figures.
  • AIPLA Files an Amicus Brief with the Court of Appeals of Virginia in Pegasystems Inc. v. Appian Corporation

    March 6, 2023

    Arlington, VA. March 6, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief with the Court of Appeals of Virginia in Pegasystems Inc. v. Appian Corporation, an appeal arising from a $2.1 billion verdict and resulting judgment in a trade secret misappropriation case brought by Appian against Pegasystems.
  • AIPLA Files an Amicus Brief at the Supreme Court in Amgen v. Sanofi

    February 14, 2023

    Arlington, VA. February 14, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court in Amgen v. Sanofi.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC

    January 20, 2023

    Arlington, VA. January 18, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC (No. 22-148) supporting reversal and remand of the Ninth Circuit’s decision below. The case involves VIP’s “humorous” use of trademarks and trade dress owned by Jack Daniel’s in connection with a dog toy product.
  • AIPLA Files Brief in Support of None of the Parties in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc.

    January 1, 2023

    Arlington, VA. January 1, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed a merits-stage amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Abitron Austria GmbH et al. v. Hetronic Int’l Inc., Case. No. 21-1043.
2022
  • AIPLA Comments on 2022 Proposed Changes to the Rules of Practice of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

    October 6, 2022

    Arlington, VA. October 3, 2022 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit pursuant to the invitation for public comment on several proposed changes to the Rules of Practice.   

      

  • Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, No. 22-148, Amicus Brief filed 9/16/22

    September 29, 2022

    Arlington, VA. September 16, 2022,- The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief in support of the Petition for Certiorari currently pending before the Supreme Court in Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, No. 22-148. The decision below, decided by the Ninth Circuit, involved the unauthorized use of trademarks and trade dress owned by Jack Daniel’s in connection with a dog toy product that purportedly parodied the Jack Daniel’s brand. Jack Daniel’s claimed that the dog toys infringed its rights under the Lanham Act. However, the Ninth Circuit held that the First Amendment protects all “humorous” or parodic uses of others’ trademarks regardless of the nature of the underlying product, becoming the first court to apply such protections outside of Lanham Act disputes involving artistic works.
  • AIPLA Files Brief In Support of Neither Party Regarding Order Setting Schedule for Director Review

    August 4, 2022

    Arlington, VA. August 4, 2022 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief  in the two PTAB cases of OpenSky Industries, LLC, Patent Quality Assurance, LLC, and Intel Corporation v. VLSI Technology LLC, which USPTO Director Vidal has taken up to address what actions the USPTO Director should take when faced with assertions of an abuse of process or conduct that otherwise thwarts, as opposed to advances, the goals of the Office and/or the AIA. AIPLA’s brief argues that the review procedures implemented in these proceedings are adequate to address the rare instances of alleged abuse of process or alleged conduct contrary to the goals of the Office and/or the AIA. 
  • ​Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, No. 21-869, Amicus Brief Filed 6/17/2022

    June 20, 2022

    AIPLA submitted an amicus brief in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, No. 21-869, the case addresses the role of transformativeness in the copyright fair use analysis.  AIPLA urged three main points on the Court.  First, the importance of a flexible, adaptable fair use doctrine, explaining that at least all four enumerated statutory fair use factors should be weighed and no one factor should be prioritized over all other factors found in 17 U.S.C. § 107. Second, AIPLA advocated for a more objective “reasonable perception” standard in determining a work’s purpose and meaning; which should mitigate against the impact of self-interested testimony and judicial preferences and yield more predictable outcomes. Third, AIPLA urged the Court to expressly reject a celebrity-plagiarist exception to copyright infringement because fair use should be applied equally to all and should not turn on whether an artist or their style is famous.

     

2021
  • UNICOLORS, INC., v. H&M HENNES & MAURITZ, L.P., Docket No. 20-915, amicus brief filed 8/10/2021

    August 10, 2021

    On August 10, 2021, AIPLA filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case, Unicolors, Inc., v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P. (Case No. 20-915). The brief notes that the Ninth Circuit decision in the case increases the risk to copyright owners in that any erroneous legal conclusions set forth in a copyright application may have draconian repercussions, and if upheld, will likely increase the costs and burdens of copyright litigation. Two courses of action are suggested, including reversing the Ninth Circuit’s decision and recognizing the inherent power of district court judges to determine whether an allegation that a registrant has knowingly included inaccurate facts is reasonably plausible before referring a case to the Register of Copyrights.

  • EZAKI GLICO CO. v. LOTTE INTERNATIONAL AMERICA CORP., Docket No. 20-1817, amicus brief filed 7/29/2021

    July 29, 2021

    On July 29, 2021, AIPLA filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case, Ezaki Glico Co. v. Lotte International America Corp. (Case No. 20-1817). The brief addresses the Third Circuit’s conclusion that product design trade dress is functional, and therefore not protectable, if it is “useful.” The brief also questions the Third Circuit’s displacement of what remained of the traditional rule with principles of the separate doctrine of aesthetic functionality. Moreover, because trade dress is typically associated with ubiquitous products (especially the trade dress that is copied), it is likely that a trade dress owner would be forced to defend its trade dress in the Third Circuit under the new rule.

  • MINERVA SURGICAL, INC., v. HOLOGIC, INC., et al., Docket Nos. 20-440, amicus brief filed 3/1/2021

    March 1, 2021

    AIPLA's amicus brief generally supports keeping the doctrine of assignor estoppel without supporting either party’s position, but allowing for certain exceptions consistent with the findings in Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. Co. v. Formica Insulation Co., 266 U.S. 342, 348 (1924). The brief distinguishes assignor estoppel from the doctrine of licensee estoppel that was abolished in Lear, Inc. v. Adkins, 395 U.S. 653 (1969), and also outlines the profound risks and cloud of uncertainty around assigned patents that might occur should the Court abolish assignor estoppel.
2020
2019
2018
2017

Judicial Advocacy Archives

To see amicus briefs filed by AIPLA from previous years, please click here

Recent Advocacy