FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit announced Raymond C. Clevenger III’s retirement from the Federal Circuit. As today’s announcement notes, Judge Clevenger served on the bench of the Federal Circuit for over 36 years, sitting on approximately 800 panels and authoring more than 1,200 opinions for the Court. White quite less important, personally I will never forget helping him carry a freshly-cut Christmas tree from his car in the basement of the courthouse to his chambers (somehow fitting the tree in the elevator), our lively debate about whether Kansas is a Plain State or part of the Midwest, and his uncanny ability to elicit admissions at oral argument. But, most of all and most importantly, I will remember his kindness and graciousness. On behalf of all the law clerks who ever interacted with him, as well as all the lawyers who ever pleaded a case he handled, we wish him great happiness in his retirement. Here is the full text of the court’s announcement.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion. It comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here is its introduction.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released one precedential order denying a petition for rehearing en banc in a patent case, four nonprecedential orders dismissing three appeals and a petition, and one nonprecedential order remanding a case to the Court of Federal Claims. Notably, Judge Dyk dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc. This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. The nonprecedential opinion also comes in a case appealed from the District of Delaware involving breach of contract and tortious interference claims. Today’s order dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the en banc order as well as links to the dismissals and remand.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. There are currently no cases pending before the Supreme Court that were previously decided by the Federal Circuit. As for petitions, since our last update, two new petitions were filed in a case raising a question related to appellate procedure and a pro se case; four waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in four pro se cases; two briefs in opposition were filed in patent cases raising questions related to inter partes review proceedings; one reply brief in support of a petition was filed in another patent case raising questions related to inter partes review proceedings; one supplemental brief was filed in a pro se case; and one amicus brief was filed in another patent case raising questions related to eligibility. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and five nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinions come in patent cases, one appealed from the Northern District of Georgia and the other from the Middle District of Florida. Both nonprecedential opinions come in patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. As for the orders, one concerns an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board; one addresses a petition for a writ of mandamus in a patent case being handled by the District of Utah; and one addresses an interlocutory appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The final two orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders as well as links to the dismissals.

Yesterday the Federal Circuit announced the schedule for its October 2026 session in Chicago. Here is the full text of the announcement.

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 Federal Circuit recently issued an opinion “affirming a ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California that granted Google LLC and YouTube LLC judgment on the pleadings on patent ineligibility grounds”;
• an article reporting how the Federal Circuit recently held that the “Patent Trial and Appeal Board was right to fully invalidate a speech recognition patent that Apple stands accused of infringing”;
• an article noting how the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal because “the 30-day deadline of 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a) for filing a notice of appeal is ‘mandatory and jurisdictional’ with no equitable exceptions”; and
• an article highlighting how the Federal Circuit recently “reversed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s dismissal” of a Presidential Innovation Fellow’s “whistleblower appeal . . . , finding he had made sufficient allegations of gross mismanagement to establish jurisdiction.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals. Here is the link to the dismissal.

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 in a case raising questions about claim construction. The court also denied three petitions in cases that raised questions about inter partes review petitions, claim construction, and eligibility. Here are the details.

One case being argued at the Federal Circuit in October attracted an amicus brief, District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority v. United States. In this case, the United States appeals a decision of the Court of Federal Claims, which awarded the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority $633,150.90 for unpaid sewer charges. In the appeal, the United States presents questions related to statutory interpretation and contractual equitable defenses. This is our argument preview.