Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post discussing a recent Federal Circuit decision that “provides a lesson into the importance of carefully drafting—and understanding—the scope of licensing terms, especially covenants not to sue”; and
- an article about how a “Federal Circuit Court of Appeals panel . . . denied an Oklahoma landowner’s bid to overturn a lower court’s ruling that the federal government isn’t liable for flooding damage to her property due to activity at a nearby Cherokee Nation casino.”
Dennis Crouch wrote a blog post for PatentlyO discussing a recent Federal Circuit decision that “provides a lesson into the importance of carefully drafting—and understanding—the scope of licensing terms, especially covenants not to sue.” The post discusses AlexSam, Inc. v. MasterCard Int’l. Inc. and “the jurisdictional hook that allowed the Federal Circuit to hear [the] case, even though it originated as a state law breach of contract claim.”
Crystal Owens authored an article for Law360 about how a “Federal Circuit Court of Appeals panel . . . denied an Oklahoma landowner’s bid to overturn a lower court’s ruling that the federal government isn’t liable for flooding damage to her property due to activity at a nearby Cherokee Nation casino.” The article discusses Berry v. United States. As explained by Owens, the appellee “urged the appellate court to overturn the ruling after a U.S. Court of Federal Claims judge tossed her lawsuit in May 2022.”