Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:
- an article commenting on “the Supreme Court’s next move” in President Trump’s tariff case;
- an article suggesting a recent Federal Circuit decision “confirms that Trump has alternate paths forward, should the Supreme Court strike down his emergency duties on most of global commerce”;
- an article suggesting a “dramatic change in how inter partes reviews are handled . . . has drawn sharp criticism from law professors and technology companies, setting up a high stakes battle at the Federal Circuit”; and
- an article highlighting how some attorneys are looking to John Squires, the newly confirmed director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “to provide clear rules and consistent practices, saying the current requirements keep changing.”
Lawrence Friedman wrote an article for JURIST commenting on “the Supreme Court’s next move” in President Trump’s tariff case. In the article, Friedman suggests the Federal Circuit’s “reasoning notably tracks the Supreme Court’s approach to statutory construction, relying upon a close reading of the text and applying the major questions doctrine.” Friedman, however, cautions that “it would be premature to bet against the administration when the case gets to the Supreme Court in November: the Court has of late upheld the exercise of executive power in a surprising array of circumstances.” For more information on the case, check out our relevant case page in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump.
Alyssa Aquino authored an article for Law.com suggesting a recent Federal Circuit decision “confirms that Trump has alternate paths forward, should the Supreme Court strike down his emergency duties on most of global commerce.” In particular, Aquino notes how the Federal Circuit recently “unanimously backed” President Trump’s power to impose “duties on $350 billion worth of Chinese goods.” For more information on this case, check out our case page in HMTX Industries LLC v. United States.
Craig Anderson wrote a commentary for The Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journal suggesting a “dramatic change in how inter partes reviews are handled . . . has drawn sharp criticism from law professors and technology companies, setting up a high stakes battle at the Federal Circuit.” As explained by Anderson, “[t]he interim director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has dramatically changed the way patents can be challenged under inter partes review by third parties, which critics say has tilted the system dramatically in favor of patent owners.”
Dani Kass authored an article for Law360 highlighting how some attorneys are looking to John Squires, the newly confirmed director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “to provide clear rules and consistent practices, saying the current requirements keep changing.” According to Kass, there is “uncertainty . . . largely coming from how acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart has been setting policy for when to discretionarily deny Patent Trial and Appeal Board petitions, which she has been doing through individual decisions.” Kass further points out that “[t]he need for clarity on discretionary denials was the priority” for some of the IP attorneys, and they “also raised hopes that Squires would address the ever-frustrating application of patent eligibility law and concerns about agency staffing and examinations.”