The Federal Circuit sends us into the weekend with the release of four nonprecedential opinions. One opinion addresses an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims in which a motion for extension to file a notice of appeal was denied. Another opinion addresses an appeal from a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding two claims unpatentable as obvious. Finally, two opinions, sharing the same named parties, address appeals from decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding certain claims unpatentable as obvious. Here are the introductions to the opinions.
United Communities, LLC v. United States (Nonprecedential)
United Communities, LLC (United Communities) filed with the United States Court of Federal Claims a motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal one month after its notice of appeal should have been filed. The court denied this motion, determining that United Communities failed to show excusable neglect. United Communities, LLC v. United States, 160 Fed. Cl. 591, 592–93 (2022) (Order). Because we do not believe the court abused its discretion in finding no excusable neglect, we affirm.
In re Universal Electronics, Inc. (Nonprecedential)
Universal Electronics, Inc. appeals a final written decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which found two claims of U.S. Patent Application No. 14/047,072 unpatentable as obvious. We affirm.
Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp. (Nonprecedential)
Apple Inc. (“Apple”) appeals from a decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) holding that claims 1−16 of Masimo’s U.S. Patent 10,433,776 (the “’776 patent”) were not unpatentable as obvious in view of the asserted prior art. Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp., No. IPR2020-01524 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 29, 2022), J.A. 1−52 (“Decision”). For the following reasons, we affirm.
Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp. (Nonprecedential)
Apple Inc. appeals a final written decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which determined that claims 1–7, 918, and 20–24 of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,703 were not unpatentable as obvious. We affirm.