This HTML5 document contains 86 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
n6https://scholar.google.com/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
n12https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/820904/gunn-v-minton/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n23https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n18https://www.leagle.com/decision/
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n15https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2012/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
n9https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n16https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n22https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/568/11-1118/
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_patent_case_law
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton
Subject Item
dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_by_the_Roberts_Court
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton
Subject Item
dbr:Gunn_v_Minton
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton
dbo:wikiPageRedirects
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton
Subject Item
dbr:568_U.S._251
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton
dbo:wikiPageRedirects
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton
Subject Item
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton
rdf:type
wikidata:Q2334719 owl:Thing dbo:Case dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase dbo:UnitOfWork dbo:LegalCase
rdfs:label
Gunn v. Minton
rdfs:comment
Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251 (2013), is a US patent law case. The case dealt with the question of jurisdiction of patent law litigation in regard to attorney malpractice. In a unanimous ruling, the United States Supreme Court decided that federal laws granting exclusive jurisdiction to cases involving patents does not preclude the ability of state courts to hear cases related to but not involving patents. The case was remanded to the Texas state courts for further proceedings.
foaf:name
Jerry W. Gunn, et al., Petitioners v. Vernon F. Minton
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_patent_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:2013_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court
dbo:wikiPageID
43446670
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1096305264
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Jurisdiction dbr:S.W.3d dbr:Judiciary_of_Texas dbr:Texas_Courts_of_Appeals dbr:Supreme_Court_of_Texas dbr:Legal_malpractice dbr:L._Ed._2d dbc:United_States_patent_case_law dbr:U.S.P.Q.2d dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:U.S._LEXIS dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:Litigation dbr:Certiorari dbr:US_patent_law dbc:2013_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Law_of_the_United_States
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n6:scholar_case%3Fcase=849731011115200703 n9:11-1118_b97c.pdf n15:2012_11_1118 n16:11-1118 n18:intxco20091009576 n18:intxco20111216500 n12: n22:
owl:sameAs
wikidata:Q18148657 yago-res:Gunn_v._Minton freebase:m.011jmy4n n23:m4eX
dbp:subsequent
Supreme Court of Texas overturned, remanded to Texas state courts for further proceedings.
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Ussc dbt:Reflist dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:SCOTUS-case-stub dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Use_mdy_dates dbt:USCSub
dbp:docket
11
dbp:joinmajority
unanimous
dbp:opinionannouncement
n9:11-1118_b97c.pdf
dbp:oralargument
n15:2012_11_1118
dbp:oyez
n16:11-1118
dbp:parallelcitations
17280.0
dbp:prior
25920.0
dbp:uspage
251
dbp:usvol
568
dbp:arguedate
0001-01-26
dbp:argueyear
2013
dbp:case
Gunn v. Minton,
dbp:courtlistener
n12:
dbp:decidedate
0001-02-20
dbp:decideyear
2013
dbp:fullname
Jerry W. Gunn, et al., Petitioners v. Vernon F. Minton
dbp:holding
, which provides for exclusive federal jurisdiction over a case “arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents,” does not deprive the state courts of subject matter jurisdiction over a state law claim alleging legal malpractice in a patent case.
dbp:justia
n22:
dbp:litigants
Gunn v. Minton
dbp:majority
Roberts
dbo:abstract
Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251 (2013), is a US patent law case. The case dealt with the question of jurisdiction of patent law litigation in regard to attorney malpractice. In a unanimous ruling, the United States Supreme Court decided that federal laws granting exclusive jurisdiction to cases involving patents does not preclude the ability of state courts to hear cases related to but not involving patents. The case was remanded to the Texas state courts for further proceedings.
dbp:googlescholar
n6:scholar_case%3Fcase=849731011115200703
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Gunn_v._Minton?oldid=1096305264&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
3288
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Gunn_v._Minton
Subject Item
wikipedia-en:Gunn_v._Minton
foaf:primaryTopic
dbr:Gunn_v._Minton