This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential order granting a petition for en banc rehearing in a design patent case addressing obviousness. The court also released three nonprecedential opinions: one in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and two in related pro se cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the order and opinions.
LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC (Precedential Order)
Appellants LKQ Corporation and Keystone Automotive Industries, Inc. (collectively, “LKQ”) filed a petition for rehearing en banc. A response to the petition was invited by the court and filed by Appellee GM Global Technology Operations LLC (“GM”). The court also accepted amicus briefs filed by TYC Americas and YC Brother Industrial Co. Ltd; Mark Bartholomew, Amy L. Landers, Ana Santos Rutschman, Sharon K. Sandeen, and Joshua D. Sarnoff; American Property Casualty Insurance Association and National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies; and Automotive Body Parts Association.
* * *
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The petition for rehearing en banc is granted.
(2) The panel opinion in LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, No. 2021-2348, 2023 WL 328228 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 20, 2023) is vacated, and the appeal is reinstated.
(3) The parties are requested to file new briefs, which shall address the following questions:
* * *
(4) While the issues of anticipation and forfeiture are preserved, the court does not require additional briefing on them.
(5) LKQ’s en banc opening brief is due 45 days from the date of this order. GM’s en banc response is due within 45 days of service of LKQ’s en banc opening brief, and LKQ’s reply brief within 30 days of service of the response brief. The parties may file a supplemental appendix, if necessary to cite to additional material, within 7 days after service of the reply brief. The parties’ briefs must comply with Fed. Cir. R. 32(b)(1).
(6) The court invites the views of the United States as amicus curiae. Any other briefs of amicus curiae may be filed without consent and leave of the court. Any amicus brief supporting LKQ’s position or supporting neither position must be filed within 14 days after service of LKQ’s en banc opening brief. Any amicus brief supporting GM’s position must be filed within 14 days after service of the GM’s response brief. Amicus briefs must comply with Fed. Cir. R. 29(b).
(7) Oral argument will be held at a time and date to be announced later.
Prisua Engineering Corp. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (Nonprecedential)
Prisua Engineering Corp. (“Prisua”) appeals a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) concluding that claims 1-4 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 8,650,591 (“’591 patent”) are unpatentable as obvious. Because substantial evidence supports the Board’s findings, we affirm.
Trimble v. Department of Veterans Affairs (Nonprecedential)
Ms. Aisha Trimble appeals a decision from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) denying her request for corrective action under the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998 (VEOA). Because the Board’s findings were supported by substantial evidence and because the Board did not legally err, we affirm.
Trimble v. Department of Veterans Affairs (Nonprecedential)
Ms. Aisha Trimble appeals a decision from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) denying her request for corrective action under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA). Because the Board’s conclusion is supported by substantial evidence, we affirm.