Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.

563 U.S. 776

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
2011-06-06
Topic
bankruptcy

*794Justice Sotomayor, concurring. I agree with the Court’s resolution of this case and with its reasoning. I write separately to note that I share Justice Breyer’s concerns as to the principles adopted by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in FilmTec Corp. v. Allied-Signal Inc., 939 F. 2d 1568 (1991), and the application of those principles to agreements that implicate the BayhDole Act. See post, at 799-803 (dissenting opinion).

*794 Justice Sotomayor,

concurring.

I agree with the Court’s resolution of this case and with its reasoning. I write separately to note that I share Justice Breyer’s concerns as to the principles adopted by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in FilmTec Corp. v. Allied-Signal Inc., 939 F. 2d 1568 (1991), and the application of those principles to agreements that implicate the BayhDole Act. See post, at 799-803 (dissenting opinion). Because Stanford failed to challenge the decision below on these grounds, I agree that the appropriate disposition is to affirm. Like the dissent, however, I understand the majority opinion to permit consideration of these arguments in a future ease. See ante, at 784, n. 2.