{"id":195725,"date":"2018-05-02T13:49:41","date_gmt":"2018-05-02T08:19:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=195725"},"modified":"2018-05-02T13:49:41","modified_gmt":"2018-05-02T08:19:41","slug":"inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/","title":{"rendered":"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of United States:<\/strong> While determining that whether the \u2018inter partes review\u2019 established under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act violates Article III or the Seventh Amendment of the US Constitution, the Court by a ratio of 7:2, held that, inter partes review does not violate the Seventh Amendment and Article III. When Congress properly assigns a matter to adjudication in a non-Article III tribunal, \u201cthe Seventh Amendment poses no independent bar to the adjudication of that action by a non-jury fact finder.\u201d<\/p>\n

As per the facts, in 2001, the petitioner Oil States Energy Services obtained a patent relating to an apparatus and method for protecting well-head equipment used in hydraulic fracturing. In 2012 however the petitioner company filed a suit against Greene\u2019s Energy (the respondent in the present case) in Federal District Court for infringing that patent. At the same time, Greene\u2019s Energy challenged the validity of the patent and instituted inter- partes review with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The inter- partes review was established by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, according to which any person other than the patent owner can file a petition for inter partes review. The petitioner can request cancellation of \u201cone or more claims of a patent\u201d on the grounds that the claim fails the novelty or non-obviousness standards for patentability; and the challenges must be made \u201conly on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications.\u201d Once inter partes review is instituted, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board\u2014an adjudicatory body within the PTO created to conduct inter partes review\u2014examines the patent\u2019s validity.<\/p>\n

Perusing the concerned laws and precedents on the point, the Court only addressed the constitutionality of inter partes review. A majority of 7 judges observed that the inter partes review falls within the public-rights doctrine as a decision to grant patents is a issue involving public rights, specifically the grant of a public franchise. Inter partes review is simply a reconsideration of that grant, and the Congress has permissibly reserved the United States Patent and Trademark Office\u2019s authority to conduct such reconsideration. However John Roberts, C.J., and Gorsuch, J., delivering the dissenting opinion, observed that a political appointee and his administrative agents instead of independent judges are not the competent authority to resolve a patent dispute. Citing various precedents and procedure from the past, the Judges held that, \u201claw traditionally treated patents issued under the Patent Clause very differently than monopoly franchises when it came to governmental invasions. Patents alone required independent judges and the decision of the Majority signals a retreat from Article III\u2019s guarantees.\u201d [Oils State Energy Services LLC v. Greene\u2019s Energy Group LLC, No. 16\u2013712, decided on 24.04.2018]<\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of United States: While determining that whether the \u2018inter partes review\u2019 established under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act violates Article <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":32691,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[30031,30030,30029,29944],"class_list":["post-195725","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-article-iii","tag-inter-partes-review","tag-leahy-smith-america-invents-act","tag-patents"],"yoast_head":"\nInter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court of United States: While determining that whether the \u2018inter partes review\u2019 established under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act violates Article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-05-02T08:19:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/\",\"name\":\"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-05-02T08:19:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"Supreme Court of The United States\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution","og_description":"Supreme Court of United States: While determining that whether the \u2018inter partes review\u2019 established under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act violates Article","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-05-02T08:19:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/","name":"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","datePublished":"2018-05-02T08:19:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"Supreme Court of The United States"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/02\/inter-partes-review-under-the-leahy-smith-america-invents-act-does-not-violate-article-iii-or-seventh-schedule-of-us-constitution\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, does not violate Article III or Seventh Schedule of US Constitution"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":292539,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/18\/supreme-court-constitution-bench-holds-jallikattu-kambala-and-bull-cart-racing-legal-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":195725,"position":0},"title":"Supreme Court Constitution Bench holds Jallikattu, Kambala and bull -cart racing legal","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court said that this decision on the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act would also guide the Maharashtra and the Karnataka Amendment Acts. Thus, it held that all the three Amendment Acts are valid legislations .","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"jallikattu","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jallikattu.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jallikattu.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jallikattu.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jallikattu.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":274133,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/21\/supreme-court-constitutionality-haryana-sikh-gurdwara-management-act-2014-sikh-gurdwaras-sikh-gurdwaras-act-1925-article-246-of-constitution-schedule-vii-entry-32-entry-28-entry-44-section-72-of-pun\/","url_meta":{"origin":195725,"position":1},"title":"Supreme Court upholds the constitutional validity of the Haryana Sikh Gurdwara (Management) Act, 2014","author":"Editor","date":"September 21, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the writ petitions challenging the constitutionality Haryana Sikh Gurdwara (Management) Act, 2014, the division bench of Hemant Gupta* and Vikram Nath, JJ. has upheld the constitutional validity of the said Act. The Court observed that the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Haryana Sikh Gurdwara Management\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-the-constitutional-validity-of-the-Haryana-Sikh-Gurdwara-Management-Act-2014-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-the-constitutional-validity-of-the-Haryana-Sikh-Gurdwara-Management-Act-2014-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-the-constitutional-validity-of-the-Haryana-Sikh-Gurdwara-Management-Act-2014-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-the-constitutional-validity-of-the-Haryana-Sikh-Gurdwara-Management-Act-2014-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Supreme-Court-upholds-the-constitutional-validity-of-the-Haryana-Sikh-Gurdwara-Management-Act-2014-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":208964,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/01\/29\/scotus-secret-sales-can-invalidate-a-patent-petitioner-denied-patent-rights-over-an-invention-which-was-available-to-public-use-prior-to-patent\/","url_meta":{"origin":195725,"position":2},"title":"SCOTUS | “Secret sales” can invalidate a patent; petitioner denied patent rights over an invention which was available to public use prior to patent","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 29, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of the United States: In order to craft a federal patent system that encourages the creation and disclosure of new inventions, Thomas, J. upheld that once an invention has been put to public use it qualifies as a prior art under the AIA Act. The petitioner developed a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":7053,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/01\/16\/the-constitution-one-hundred-and-twenty-second-amendment-bill-2014\/","url_meta":{"origin":195725,"position":3},"title":"The Constitution (One-Hundred and Twenty-second Amendment) Bill, 2014","author":"Sucheta","date":"January 16, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"On 19-12-2014, the Constitution (One-Hundred and Twenty-second Amendment) Bill, 2014 was introduced in the Lok Sabha. The objective of the Bill is to further amend the Constitution of India to introduce the goods and services tax for conferring concurrent taxing powers on the Union as well as the States. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Legislation Updates"","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":185634,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/03\/jallikattu-constitution-bench-decide-constitutionality-tn-amendments-prevention-cruelty-animals-act-1960\/","url_meta":{"origin":195725,"position":4},"title":"Jallikattu: Constitution Bench to decide the constitutionality of the TN Amendments to Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"February 3, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the petition seeking compliance of Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja, (2014) 7 SCC 547,\u00a0 in the light of the cruelty to Bulls in the Jallikattu event, the bench of Dipak Misra, CJ and RF Nariman, J referred the matter to a 5-judge Constitution bench\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":276425,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/28\/maintainability-before-merit-the-prerequisite-in-states-suits-against-the-union-under-article-131\/","url_meta":{"origin":195725,"position":5},"title":"Maintainability Before Merit: The Prerequisite in States’ Suits Against the Union Under Article 131","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 28, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Rahul Agarwal\u2020 and Madhav Goel\u2020\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "OP. ED."","block_context":{"text":"OP. ED.","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Prerequisite","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/195725","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=195725"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/195725\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32691"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=195725"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=195725"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=195725"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}