FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions. The first comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, Judge Newman dissented, disagreeing with the majority’s decision to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. The second comes in a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. In this case, the Federal Circuit reverses the Court of Federal Claims’ dismissal and remands the case. The Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential opinion in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Finally, the court issued two nonprecedential orders and two Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the orders, and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a petition to review a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, which had dismissed an appeal as moot. The second comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The Federal Circuit also released five nonprecedential orders this morning and late yesterday. One dismisses a petition for review for untimely filing; one denies a petition for a writ of mandamus for untimely filing; one denies a petition for a writ of mandamus to order the Western District of Texas to transfer a patent case; one summarily affirms; and one grants a petition to withdraw a petition for writ of mandamus. Here are the introductions to the opinions and text from the orders.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article arguing that in patent cases the Federal Circuit recently strayed from the Supreme Court’s “flexible approach to obviousness”;
• a blog post analyzing the Federal Circuit’s alleged “improper destabilization of settled res judicata principles” in patent cases;
• another article discussing how the “Federal Circuit has provided uniformity” regarding the proper interpretation of the America Invents Act’s estoppel provision; and
• a third article identifying primary takeaways from a recent Federal Circuit ruling addressing patent law’s experimental-use doctrine and on-sale bar.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions. The first comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Notably, Judge Newman dissented. The second comes in a patent case appealed from the Central District of California. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the District of Utah. Finally, the court released three nonprecedential orders. One denies a petition to transfer a case to the Northern District of California; one dismisses an appeal for lack of jurisdiction and denies petitions for writs of mandamus; and one denies a petition and cross-petition to appeal from an order of the Northern District of California. Here are the introductions to the opinions and text from the orders.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, since our last update there is no new activity to report. With respect to petitions, three new petitions have been filed: one in a patent case, one filed by a pro se petitioner in a veterans case, and one by another pro se petitioner in an employment case. Additionally, an amicus brief in support of a petition was filed in a patent case raising questions concerning patent eligibility; a brief in opposition was filed in another patent eligibility case; a waiver of a right to respond was filed in a patent case concerning standing; and a petitioner filed a reply in a case raising a question about the Chevron doctrine’s applicability in veterans cases. Finally, the Court denied three petitions: two in takings cases and one in a patent case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions in two veterans cases, a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, and a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The court also released a nonprecedential order granting a joint motion to dismiss and two nonprecedential orders granting petitions to withdraw petitions. Here are the introductions to the opinions and text from the orders.

Today the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. One came in an employment case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The other came in an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims, which had dismissed a complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also dismissed an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Today the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions in employment, veterans, and patent cases. The court also released seven orders. Five granted summary affirmances and two dismissed all of one case and part of another. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a list of the summary affirmances and dismissals.

Late last month, the Supreme Court heard arguments in George v. McDonough, a case that raises an important question regarding review for clear and unmistakable error in the denial of a veteran’s claim for disability benefits: “When the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denies a veteran’s claim for benefits in reliance on an agency interpretation that is later deemed invalid under the plain text of the statutory provisions in effect at the time of the denial, is that the kind of ‘clear and unmistakable error’ that the veteran may invoke to challenge VA’s decision?” This is our argument recap.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a trade case, a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case, and a nonprecedential opinion in a takings case. The court also issued a nonprecedential order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus to order the Western District of Texas to transfer a patent case, a nonprecedential order remanding cases to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and five nonprecedential orders dismissing cases. Here are the introductions to the opinions and text from the orders.