Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights a call by the Federal Circuit for the U.S. Patent and Trademark office to comment on the scope and effect of Arthrex, a comment on implied patent licenses, and a report that Apple has another shot at invalidating claims of a patent it has been accused of infringing.

Ian Lopez wrote for Bloomberg Law that “[t]he Federal Circuit is directing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to chime in on whether its ruling that agency administrative law judges were unconstitutionally appointed could be used to undo administrative reviews of patent examiner findings.” According to Lopez, the court “on Wednesday called for patent office director Andrei Iancu to address whether its Arthrex Inc. v. Smith and Nephew, Inc. decision should be extended to Patent Trial and Appeal Board cases involving patent office examiner findings.” The Federal Circuit issued this call in an order in In re Boloro Global Ltd., a case currently pending before a panel of the court.

At PatentlyO, Dennis Crouch commented on the Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Cheetah Omni LLC v. AT&T Services, Inc., saying it “solidifies the presumption that a license to a particular patent impliedly includes a license to all parents and continuations that ‘disclose the same inventions as the licensed patent.'” Crouch notes that “[t]his particular style implied license appears to fall under federal law in finding that a patentee is legally estopped from claiming no-implied-license.”

Jan Wolfe reported for Reuters that in Apple Inc. v. Andrea Electronics Corporation “the Federal Circuit . . . gave Apple Inc another shot at invalidating claims in a patent on digital audio processing technology it has been accused of infringing.” Wolfe notes the court held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board “incorrectly found that Apple’s argument was raised too late in the proceedings and remanded the case back to the board so Apple could make its case.”