FedCircuitBlog

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article discussing how the “Supreme Court on Monday turned away Judge Pauline Newman’s bid to return to service on” the Federal Circuit;
• an article covering how the Supreme Court denied Judge “Newman’s petition for review without comment, as is typical”;
• an article reporting how late last week the Federal Circuit ruled the “U.S. government can continue collecting the 10% worldwide tariff it imposed in February”; and
• an article similarly highlighting how Federal Circuit “extended its block on ​a lower court ruling against the Trump ‌administration’s 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act”;

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and one nonprecedential order. One opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and one comes in response to a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The order dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions as well as a link to the dismissal.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released another nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. That is it. Here are links to the dismissals.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• a blog post reporting how the New Civil Liberties Alliance filed a reply brief at the Supreme Court on behalf of Judge Newman;
• a blog post highlighting how “a unanimous court rejected the idea that a generics pharmaceutical manufacturer . . . can be held responsible for infringements of patents held by the branded manufacturer . . . based on the decisions of doctors and pharmacies to use the generic compound for patented uses of the drug”;
• a blog post explaining how, when “[c]onfronted with four patents drawn to the same basic invention, the Federal Circuit held one group of claims ineligible and a second group eligible”; and
• a blog post discussing how “more than a dozen patent matters now sit before the [Supreme] Court.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. One of the opinions comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas, and one comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. One of the orders comes in response to a petition for a writ of mandamus, and the other dismisses an appeal. Here are introductions to the opinions and the first order as well as a link to the dismissal.

Yesterday the Federal Circuit announced a modification to the court’s Internal Operating Procedure. Here is a markup showing how the court changed responsibilities for post-calendar motions:

The action chambers on a post-calendar motion shall be that of the judge who has been assigned the responsibility of authoring, or who has authored the opinion. If a post-calendar motion requires action before hearing, the presiding judge of the merits panel will preassign the opinion-authoring responsibility, subject to reassignment after the hearing if necessary. The authoringAs a general matter, the action judge will decide whether to act alone on a motion or to obtain the views of procedural motions but must notify the other merits panel members (in conference or byof any such ruling. Procedural motions include motions for extensions of time, withdrawal of counsel, and acceptance of papers lacking proper form and content. These motions do not include motions to add counsel which require a vote sheet).of all panel members.

Here is the full text of the announcement.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. In the only pending case, a patent case addressing inducement of infringement and so-called skinny-labeling, since our last update the Court issued its decision. As for pending petitions, no new petitions were filed; two waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in a patent case and a pro se case; and two reply briefs were filed in patent cases. Here are the details.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders, one dismissing an appeal and one responding to a petition for a writ of mandamus. This morning the court released one nonprecedential opinion, two nonprecedential orders, and two Rule 36 summary affirmances. The opinion comes in response to a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board.  One of the nonprecedential orders comes in response to a petition for a writ of mandamus, and the other dismisses an appeal. Here are introductions to the opinions and orders related to petitions as well as links to the summary affirmances and dismissals.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, two new responses were filed in response to a petition raising a question related to correction of inventorship; a citation of supplemental authority was filed in a case related to the Hatch-Waxman Act; and the court denied one petition in another case raising questions related to correction of inventorship. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released seven nonprecedential opinions and two Rule 36 summary affirmances. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, two come in veterans cases appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, one comes in a takings case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, and two come in response to petitions for review of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions as well as links to the summary affirmances.