Supreme Court Rules on Scope of Federal Contractors' Rights in Federally Funded Inventions
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.07.11
On June 6, 2011, the United States Supreme Court, by a 7-2 margin, held in Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., No. 09-1159, that the term "subject invention" in the Bayh-Dole Act (35 U.S.C. § 200, et seq.), the statute that allocates certain rights in federally funded "subject invention[s]," includes only inventions for which the contractor has obtained a valid assignment from the employee inventor(s), and, therefore, that a contractor (and presumably the government) cannot obtain rights to an invention under the Bayh-Dole Act absent such an assignment. In so holding, the Court stated that the Bayh-Dole Act "simply assures contractors that they may keep title to whatever it is they already have" – which serves as a reminder to federal contractors desiring title to their employees' inventions to obtain valid assignments.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
