This morning the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions in patent cases. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Shoes by Firebug LLC v. Stride Rite Children’s Group, LLC (Precedential)

Shoes by Firebug LLC (“Firebug”) appeals from two final written decisions of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) holding claims 1–10 of U.S. Patent 8,992,038 (“’038 patent”) and claims 1–10 of U.S. Patent 9,301,574 (“’574 patent”) unpatentable as obvious. See Stride Rite Children’s Grp., LLC v. Shoes by Firebug LLC, No. IPR2017- 01809, 2019 WL 236242 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 16, 2019) (“-1809 Decision”); Stride Rite Children’s Grp., LLC v. Shoes By Firebug LLC, No. IPR2017-01810, 2019 WL 237069 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 16, 2019) (“-1810 Decision”). Because the Board did not err in its conclusion that the claims would have been obvious over the prior art, we affirm.

Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc. (Precedential)

Nike, Inc. owns U.S. Patent Nos. 7,814,598 and 8,266,749, which share a specification and are directed to methods of manufacturing an article of footwear with a textile upper. See ’598 patent at 1:18–21. Adidas AG petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1–13 of the ’598 patent and claims 1–9, 11–19 and 21 of the ’749 patent. The Board held that Adidas had not demonstrated that the challenged claims are unpatentable as obvious. Adidas appeals. Because the Board did not err in its obviousness analysis and substantial evidence supports its underlying factual findings, we affirm.