Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights commentary on the copyright case Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. pending before the Supreme Court, a possible petition to the Supreme Court regarding standing to challenge Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions, and updated oral argument guidelines issued by the Federal Circuit.
Sue Ghosh Stricklett commented for IPWatchDog on Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., which is currently pending before the Supreme Court. In contrast to the slew of top-side amicus briefs filed this month in support of reversal of the Federal Circuit’s copyrightability and fair use rulings, Stricklett argues that “Google’s ‘fair use’ defense has been soundly rejected by the Federal Circuit due to Google’s unlicensed commercial use of copyrighted content.” Stricklett states that the Silicon Valley companies supporting Google “are wrong,” noting that, “[f]or years, Oracle has maintained a copyright over its Java program, choosing who to allow access to the company’s proprietary software.” Stricklett urges the Supreme Court to “uphold the inventor’s fundamental Constitutional right to copyright protection” to avoid “a chilling effect on innovators who bear the cost of original content development.” (We previously reported on the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in this case as well as recent filings in the case, including Google’s opening brief and a number of amicus briefs filed this month. You can find links to all case filings on the case’s case page. This page is automatically updated with each filing in the case. The case page also includes links to all of our blog posts about the case.)
Matthew Bultman reported for Bloomberg Law that “General Electric Co. is poised to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider when patent challengers can appeal a loss at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board” following the Federal Circuit’s denial of its petition in General Electric Company v. United Technologies Corp. Bultman notes that the Federal Circuit “held GE lacked standing to appeal the administrative board’s decision to uphold claims in a rival’s jet engine patent.” According to Bultman, “GE says the court has adopted a rigid standing rule in patent validity disputes that harms competition” and “other federal appeals courts take a more flexible approach when considering the competitive harms that can establish standing.”
Over at 717 Madison Place, Bill Vobach highlighted that “[t]he Federal Circuit has updated its guidelines for oral arguments.” The Federal Circuit released an announcement on its website regarding the updated Guide for Oral Argument. As explained by Vobach, “the guide has added a new section VI” titled “Guidelines for Counsel During Argument” that is meant “to assist counsel in making the best use of the allotted time at argument.”