Hungerpiller, in return, sought legal tort action against the USPS within the United States Court of Federal Claims in 2011, under 28 U.S.C.

While the Federal Claims case was ongoing, the USPS used the recently passed Leahy-Smith Act to seek a covered business method (CBM) review of Hungerpiller's patent though the Patent office, as allowed for under the Act's new post-grant review processes.

A "government attorney told the justices at oral arguments in February that as of that time, federal agencies had filed a total of 20 AIA petitions.

This presumption reflects “common usage,” United States v. Mine Workers, 330 U. S. 258, 275, as well as an express directive from Congress in the Dictionary Act, 1 U.S.C.§1.

" Finally, the Postal Service argues that it must be a “person” who may petition for AIA review proceedings because, like other potential infringers, it is subject to civil liability and can assert a defense of patent invalidity.

Federal agencies, however, face lower and more calculable risks than nongovernmental actors, so it is reasonable for Congress to have treated them differently.

The Supreme Court's opinion noted that since 1981, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has allowed government agencies to file ex parte reexaminations.

The Court's ruling did not answer the questions whether Federal executive agencies can initiate inter party reviews, but following the logic of the majority, they cannot.