This morning, the Federal Circuit released two opinions, one precedential and one nonprecedential, both in patent cases. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a post-grant review proceeding and addresses claim construction, written description, enablement, and motions to amend practice and procedure under the Administrative Procedure Act. The nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of an inter partes review and addresses claim construction and anticipation. Late yesterday and this morning, the court also released two nonprecedential orders, one denying a petition for a writ of mandamus that would order transfer, and one dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and order and a link to the dismissal.
Medytox, Inc. v. Galderma S.A. (Precedential)
Appellant Medytox, Inc. appeals a final written decision in a post-grant review proceeding of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that denied Medytox’s revised motion to amend to substitute claims 19–27 of U.S. Patent No. 10,143,728. On appeal, Medytox challenges the Board’s findings on claim construction, written description, and enablement. Medytox also challenges the Board’s Pilot Program concerning motion to amend practice and procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act. We affirm.
Intel Corporation v. Qualcomm Incorporated (Nonprecedential)
Intel Corporation appeals two decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding claims 10 and 15–20 of U.S. Patent No. 8,698,558 patentable. Because the Board properly construed “boosted supply voltage or the first supply voltage” to require a “selective boost” and because the Board’s finding that Kwak does not anticipate is supported by substantial evidence, we affirm.
In re OnePlus Technology (Shenzen) Co. (Nonprecedential Order)
Atlas Global Technologies LLC brought this patent infringement suit against OnePlus Technology (Shenzen) Co., Ltd. in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division. The district court denied OnePlus’s motion to transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to the United States District Court for the Central District of California or, alternatively, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. OnePlus now petitions this court for a writ of mandamus that would vacate that order and direct transfer.
* * *
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The petition is denied.