Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an article discussing how the “Senate Judiciary Committee may consider two important patent laws this week: the Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership (PREVAIL) Act and the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA)”; and
- an article highlighting a petition for a writ of certiorari filed with the Supreme Court “presenting the question of whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC’s) habit of issuing one-word affirmances under Rule 36(a) is prohibited under 35 U.S.C. § 144.”
Christine McDaniel authored an article published by Forbes discussing how the “Senate Judiciary Committee may consider two important patent laws this week: the Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership (PREVAIL) Act and the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA).” According to McDaniel, the patent “system has been weakened over the years due to a series of court decisions and several design flaws in earlier legislation.” But, she continues, “[i]n a pleasant surprise, legislators might be willing to do something about it during the lame-duck session.”
Eileen McDermott filed an article with IP Watchdog highlighting a petition for a writ of certiorari filed with the Supreme Court “presenting the question of whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC’s) habit of issuing one-word affirmances under Rule 36(a) is prohibited under 35 U.S.C. § 144.” McDermott says “[t]he court’s use of Rule 36 has increased in recent years and is a controversial subject.” The case is Island Intellectual Property LLC v. TD Ameritrade, Inc. The Supreme Court, notably, has denied several petitions on point in the last few years.