Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post about the “high-stakes patent dispute between VirnetX and Apple” highlighting “VirnetX’s new petition asking the Supreme Court to review two important Federal Circuit rulings”; and
- an article discussing how the U.S. Supreme Court “declined to rethink the court’s Alice and Mayo rulings on patent eligibility.”
Dennis Crouch wrote an blog post for Patently-O about the “high-stakes patent dispute between VirnetX and Apple” highlighting “VirnetX’s new petition asking the Supreme Court to review two important Federal Circuit rulings.” According to Crouch, “[t]he VirnetX petition focuses on the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of the inter partes review (‘IPR’) joinder provisions and the requirements of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (‘FVRA’).” For further coverage of the case, see our case page at VirnetX Inc. v. Mangrove Partners Master Fund, Ltd.
Andrew Karpan wrote an article for Law360 discussing how the U.S. Supreme Court “declined to rethink the court’s Alice and Mayo rulings on patent eligibility.” Karpan highlights how a lawyer for a petitioner told Law360 “[t]he Supreme Court has now been asked by the better part of a hundred aggrieved parties to provide clarity to the Alice/Mayo doctrine.” Karpan also notes the “Supreme Court denied a second patent eligibility case on the same order list Monday.” For further coverage of the first case, see our case page Killian v. Vidal.