En Banc Activity

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Telephonic oral argument was scheduled in the veterans case pending before the en banc court. As for petitions in patent cases, highlights include two new petitions raising questions related to transfer of venue and eligible subject matter; a new invitation to respond to a petition raising a question related to venue in the context of Hatch-Waxman; and three amicus briefs filed in support of a petitioner in a pro se case. Here are the details.

En Banc Cases

Telephonic oral argument was scheduled for February 4, 2021 in the pending en banc veterans case Arellano v. Wilkie. This case addresses the availability of equitable tolling in the context of disability benefits based on applications filed within one year from the date of the veteran’s discharge or release.

En Banc Petitions

New Petitions

New petitions were filed in two cases.

In In re Apple, Inc., Uniloc asked the en banc court to review the following two questions:

  1. “What level of deference should this Court afford on mandamus review of discretionary transfer decisions?”
  2. “Can this Court find a clear abuse of discretion, amounting to a usurpation of judicial power, based on (1) arguments and law never presented to the district court; (2) creating new law instead of following applicable regional circuit law; (3) substituting its weighing of discretionary factors for the district court’s; or (4) impinging on the district court’s discretion to control its docket?”

In C R Bard Inc. v. AngioDynamics, Inc., AngioDynamics asked the en banc court to review the following two questions:

  1. “Whether the panel erred in adopting a bright-line rule that claims reciting printed matter must be directed solely to that printed matter in order to be abstract as a mental process at Alice step one.”
  2. “Whether the panel erred by resolving factual issues, properly considered at Alice step two, as part of its step one analysis.”

New Invitation for Response

The Federal Circuit invited a response to a petition in the following case:

New Amicus Briefs

Three amicus briefs were filed in Arunachalam v. Citigroup, Inc., a pro se case, in support of the petitioner.