News

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

  • an article summarizing a recent interview with Judge Newman regarding the ongoing investigation into her fitness to serve as a judge;
  • a blog post featuring opinions on two recently introduced bills that would reform patent laws with respect to patent eligibility and the procedures for inter partes review and post grant review proceedings;
  • an article providing an overview of inter partes review and post grant review petitions and their resolution by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Federal Circuit; and
  • an article about “broad changes” the Federal Circuit has recently signaled regarding “jurisdictional issues in bid protests and Contract Disputes Act claims.”

Kelcee Griffis authored an article for Bloomberg Law summarizing a recent interview with Judge Newman regarding the ongoing investigation into her fitness to serve as a judge. Griffis remarks how, in the interview, Judge Newman “offer[ed] the most substantial comments she has made about the attempt to oust her.”

Eileen McDermott wrote a blog post for IPWatchdog featuring opinions on two recently introduced bills that would reform patent laws with respect to patent eligibility and the procedures for inter partes and post grant review proceedings. She highlighted how Nick Matich, a McKool Smith IP attorney, said that “[p]assing the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act would be a boon to innovation in the United States.” She also highlighted how Adam Mossoff, a professor at George Mason University, called these bill “fantastic developments in shifting the policy discussions to real reform of the patent system, as opposed to the barrage of legislative proposals over the past 10-15 years that have only weakened or outright eliminated patent rights.”

Michael Green, Larry Kass, and John Molenda authored an article for Law360 providing an overview of inter partes review and post grant review petitions and their resolution by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Federal Circuit. They note that these types of reviews “can be an attractive and effective weapon to challenge biologics-related patents, both from the standpoint of innovators and biosimilar applicants.” They further remark that they “expect the biopharma industry to continue employing both procedures as market conditions and product launches warrant.”

Richard W. Arnholt and Adam R. Briscoe authored an article for Reuters about “broad changes” the Federal Circuit has recently signaled regarding “jurisdictional issues in bid protests and Contract Disputes Act claims.” They note that one of the takeaways from recent Federal Circuit rulings for bid protests is that the court “is motivated to distinguish between statutory standing and Article III jurisdiction as it relates to the Tucker Act and long-standing precedent.” They also highlight a takeaway for Contract Disputes Act claims that there is “a slight leveling of the playing field between government and contractors in CDA disputes since the government has often cited to procedural defects, including sum certain and price definitization, as jurisdictional issues long after the contractor’s opportunity to cure any potential issue has passed.”