Principal Michael Ballanco on the Federal Circuit’s Refined Approach to Standing in Patent Cases

Following a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision — A.L.M. Holding Co. v. Zydex Industries Private Ltd. — that recalibrated how courts evaluate constitutional standing in patent cases, Principal Michael Ballanco spoke with Law360 about the ruling and its implications. In the article, Ballanco explained that while constitutional and statutory standing remain distinct legal inquiries, they often rely on overlapping facts and evidence. He emphasized the significant procedural impact of constitutional standing, noting that, unlike statutory standing issues, a lack of constitutional standing requires dismissal of a case regardless of how far it has progressed.

Excerpt: “If a lawsuit is brought, and it's found that there was no constitutional standing when it was brought, then the case necessarily must be dismissed. The case has gone through trial, a full trial has been heard, the case is on appeal, and it's determined there's no constitutional standing. You have to start over. That's the consequence.”

Read the full article: Fed. Circ. 'Recalibrates' Analysis For Constitutional Standing