This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case, a nonprecedential opinion in a government contracts case, and a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. The court also issued a nonprecedential order in a patent case denying a petition for a writ of mandamus that would have directed the Northern District of California to vacate an order denying a motion to dismiss based on the first-to-file doctrine. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

John Bean Technologies Corp. v. Morris & Associates, Inc. (Precedential)

This appeal is from a decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas that, on remand from this court, granted-in part Morris & Associates, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment as to equitable intervening rights, denied-in-part its motion as to prosecution laches, and dismissed the case. John Bean appeals the district court decision as to equitable intervening rights and Morris cross-appeals the decision as to prosecution laches. For the following reasons, we affirm the district court’s decision.

HVF West, LLC v. United States (Nonprecedential)

The United States (“Government”) and Lamb Depollution, Inc. (”Lamb”) appeal the final judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“Claims Court”) in this bid protest case holding that it had subject matter jurisdiction to hear HVF West, LLC’s (“HVF”) bid protest claim and that HVF had standing to bring the claim, and further granting HVF’s motion for judgment on the administrative record. HVF West, LLC v. United States, 146 Fed. Cl. 314 (2019). For the reasons set forth below, we reverse.

In re Fatigue Fracture Technology, LLC (Nonprecedential)

Fatigue Fracture Technology, LLC (FFT) appeals a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision affirming an examiner’s final rejection of claims 1, 3, 5, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 7,497,361 during ex parte reexamination. Those claims, the Board held, would have been obvious over the combination of Cavallo and Bayliss. We affirm.

In re VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. (Nonprecedential Order)

VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. petitions this court for a writ of mandamus directing the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to vacate its order denying VoIP-Pal’s motion to dismiss this declaratory judgment action. VoIP-Pal contends that granting its motion was required under the first-to-file rule. Because we conclude that the court did not clearly abuse its discretion in declining to apply that rule here, we deny the petition.