Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

  • an article discussing how the government advised the Supreme Court that a pending patent case is a “‘suitable vehicle for providing greater clarity’ on when an invention can be patented”;
  • another article addressing the Federal Circuit’s “focus on using mandamus to compel transfer of cases”; and
  • a third article explaining how the “Federal Circuit’s newest judge continues to hear Delaware cases” after his promotion.

Blake Brittain filed an article with Reuters discussing how the government recently advised the Supreme Court to grant the petition for writ of certiorari in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC. Brittain explained how the case left the Federal Circuit “‘bitterly divided’ and ‘at a loss’ on how to apply Section 101, in one of its judges’ own words.” As the article notes, the government’s amicus brief argued that, “‘[u]nder Section 101 as interpreted for more than 150 years, petitioner’s claims recite a patent-eligible process.'” Further, as the article emphasizes, the government maintained that “American Axle’s invention was a ‘paradigmatic’ example of an industrial manufacturing method that should be patent eligible.”

Eileen McDermott wrote an article for IPWatchdog addressing how, in In re Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit “granted Apple’s petition for writ of mandamus asking the court to direct the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to transfer a case . . . to the Northern District of California.” As the article notes, the Federal Circuit found that “Judge Alan Albright of the Western District of Texas clearly abused his discretion in denying the motion because the public and private interest factors plainly favored transfer.” Addressing the Federal Circuit’s recent transfer trend from the Western District of Texas to the Northern District of California, McDermott argued that “it is at least partly rooted in anti-patent sentiment and the CAFC judges’ view that Albright’s court is hearing too many patent cases.”

Samantha Handler published an article for Bloomberg Law discussing how “the newest judge on the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has been straddling two courts—the appeals court and his old stomping ground in the US District Court for the District of Delaware—since he was elevated in March.” As the article notes, Blair M. Jacobs, an attorney, explained that by continuing to hear Delaware cases, Judge Leonard P. Stark “‘helps significantly in alleviating the transitional period that [the District of Delaware] would face not having a judge for about a year until the new judge is confirmed.’”