Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court invited a response to a petition concerning patent eligibility. Additionally, the court denied a petition concerning means-plus-function claim limitations. Lastly, the court granted a motion to withdraw a petition concerning the extent of estoppel in claim construction. Here are the details.
En Banc Petitions
New Invitation to Respond
The Federal Circuit invited a response to petition in Yu v. Apple, Inc., where the petition raised the following issues:
- “Whether the specific requirements recited in the language of a claim can be disregarded in determining the ‘focus’ of the claim under step one of the Alice/Mayo test for patent-eligibility.”
- “Whether a claimed combination of non-abstract (e.g., structural) limitations that has not been shown to exist in the prior art can be found to be ‘generic’ and ‘conventional.’”
- “Whether a court can make adverse findings of fact against the non-moving party at the pleadings stage that are inconsistent with the patent specification, the file history, and/or plausible allegations in the complaint.”
- “Whether a claim that presents no danger of preempting an ‘abstract idea,’ either generally or in a particular field of use or technological environment, can be found ineligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101.”
The Federal Circuit denied the petition in SPEX Technologies, Inc. v. Western Digital Corp., where Western Digital Corp. asked the court to address issues concerning means-plus-function claim limitations.
New Motion to Withdraw
The Federal Circuit granted Intervenor 10X Genomics Inc. and Appellant Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.’s Motion to Withdraw in Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, where the petition raised issues concerning the doctrine of assignor estoppel and claim construction.