FedCircuitBlog

Two cases being argued at the Federal Circuit in April attracted amicus briefs. One of these cases is A.L.M. Holding Co. v. Zydex Industries Private Ltd, a patent case. In it, A.L.M. Holding appeals a district court’s conclusion that it lacked Article III standing. This is our argument preview.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. This morning, the court released one precedential opinion and four nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and includes a dissenting opinion by Judge Dyk. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in appeals of decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board; one comes in a patent case on appeal from a district court; and the final nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to yesterday’s dismissals.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, three new petitions for en banc rehearing were filed raising questions related to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, expert witness analyses related to disclosed structure for means-plus-function limitations, and patent eligibility; one new response was filed to a petition raising questions related to de minimis infringement; and the Federal Circuit denied a petition that raised a question related to eligibility. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion. It comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

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

• an article suggesting the “Trump administration’s 10% stake in Intel Corp. may give plaintiffs in patent disputes a weapon against the company”;
• a blog post discussing how the “course of the proceedings involving the attempts to remove Judge Pauline Newman from the Federal Circuit is long and in many senses tragic”;
• a blog post observing how “the effective term for most U.S. patents is considerably shorter” than 20 years because “roughly 60% of all patentees now abandon their patents before the full term expires”; and
• an article noting how the “Federal Circuit’s rejection of all mandamus petitions asking it to rein in the way U.S. Patent and Trademark Office leadership is ​evaluating patent challenges cements the appeals court’s near-impossible standard for reviewing institution decisions.”

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. This morning, the court released one nonprecedential opinion in an appeal of a decision of the merit Systems Protection Board. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the dismissals.

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, the respondent’s merits brief was filed. As for pending petitions, since our last update, two new petitions were filed in a patent case and a pro se case; a waiver of the right to respond to a petition was filed in another pro se case; and the Supreme Court denied petitions in a case addressing sanctions and two pro se cases. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Northern District of California; the nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of of a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review proceeding. Here are introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, two new petitions for en banc rehearing were filed in patent cases raising questions related to obviousness and apportionment; the court issued two invitations for responses in patent cases raising questions related to obviousness and de minimis infringement; and the court denied a petition raising questions related to judicial estoppel and appellate procedure. Here are the details.

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