FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. There are currently no pending cases. As for pending petitions, since our last update, four new petitions were filed in a government contract case, a patent case, and two pro se cases; one waiver of the right to respond to a petition was filed in a case originally decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board; two reply briefs were filed in a takings case and a patent case; and the Supreme Court denied three petitions in a trade case, a takings case, and a veterans case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit granted a petition for en banc initial hearing in Jackler v. Department of Justice to review a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The question presented is: “Whether the Civil Service Reform Act’s procedural and substantive protections for federal workers conflict with the President’s Article II removal power.” Here is the full text of this morning’s order. We will report more on this case later.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential order and three nonprecedential opinions. The order grants a petition for initial hearing en banc in a case originally decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the opinions comes in a patent case appealed form the District of New Jersey, one comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and one comes in response to a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the order and opinions.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, one new petition for en banc rehearing was filed raising several questions related to attorney’s fees. One new response to a petition was filed in a case a case raising a question related to the Hatch-Waxman Act. A response to a notice of supplemental authority was filed in the same case. And, finally, one petition was denied in a case raising questions related to standing. Here are the details. 

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning the court released one nonprecedential opinion and one nonprecedential order. The opinion comes in response to a petition for review of regulations promulgated by the Department of Veterans Affairs. The order dismisses a petition. Here is the introduction to the opinion as well as links to the dismissals.

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.