FedCircuitBlog

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. This morning, the court released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and four nonprecedential orders denying petitions for writs of mandamus. The precedential opinion comes in a trade case on appeal from the Court of International Trade. The nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent case addressing eligibility on appeal from a district court. Of the denials of petitions, three relate to petitions seeking to order the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to vacate non-institution decisions on petitions for inter partes review. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders denying petitions, along with 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 reporting how the “Supreme Court struck down Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs that he pursued under a law meant for use in national emergencies”;
• an article discussing how the Supreme Court’s tariff decision undercuts President Trump’s “signature economic policy” and delivers Trump’s “biggest legal defeat since he returned to the White House”;
• an article explaining how the Supreme Court “ruled that the tariffs exceed the powers given to the president by Congress under a 1977 law providing him the authority to regulate commerce during national emergencies created by foreign threats”; and
• an article identifying “six takeaways from the decision” by the Supreme Court.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and two errata. The opinion comes in an appeal of judgment of patent invalidity and a dismissal of breach-of-contract claims. It discusses when a claim’s preamble should be construed as limiting and addresses indefiniteness regarding spatial terms. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the errata.

This evening the Federal Circuit announced the court will open two hours late tomorrow, February 23. Here is the full text of the announcement.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and three nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in a patent infringement case and reverses a finding of patent ineligibility. Two of the three nonprecedential opinions come in appeals of decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, while the third nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims in a vaccine case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

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

• a piece indicating that, “[f]or businesses awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on President Trump’s tariffs, the next three chances for a decision will be Feb. 20, Feb. 24 and Feb. 25”;
• an article suggesting that, “[e]ven as small businesses wait for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on President Donald Trump’s tariff authority, . . . uncertainty around import duties will continue”;
• an article identifying “a number of trends” related to petitions and decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Federal Circuit and correlating “those trends to concurrent developments in the biopharma industry and legal landscape”; and
• a blog post discussing “whether patent owners are better off facing post-grant challenges at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board . . . or the Central Reexamination Unit . . . at the United States Patent and Trademark Office.”

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released one precedential opinion and two nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in a patent infringement case, and the key claim at issue in the dispute was a means-plus-function limitation. One of the nonprecedential opinions also comes in another patent infringement case; the other nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the Supreme Court set a date for oral argument in a patent case; a new petition was filed in a patent case addressing expert witness testimony and the standard for granting judgment as a matter of law; a waiver of the right to respond to a petition was filed; a reply brief was filed in support of a petition in a takings case; and an amicus brief was filed in a patent case addressing appellate procedure. Here are the details.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Bee v. United States, a case we have been following because it attracted two amicus briefs. In this case, William Bee appeals the denial of his request to have his military records reflect medical retirement rather than voluntary separation. Judges Reyna, Clevenger, and Chen heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.