Here is an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases, we highlight two new opinions, four recent oral arguments, and five upcoming oral arguments. Here are the details.
Recent Opinions
Since our last update, the Federal Circuit has issued two opinions in cases pending before panels that attracted amicus briefs.
HMTX Industries LLC v. United States
The Federal Circuit issued its opinion in HMTX v. United States, a trade case we have been following because it attracted four amicus briefs. In this case, the court reviewed a judgment of the Court of International Trade. That court held that certain actions of the U.S. Trade Representative did not exceed statutory authority and satisfied requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. Judge Hughes authored an opinion for the Federal Circuit affirming the judgment of the Court of International Trade. See our opinion summary for more information.
Director of the Office of Personnel Management v. Moulton
The court also issued its opinion in Director of the Office of Personnel Management v. Moulton. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The MSPB affirmed an administrative judge’s decision that a statutory provision requires the Office of Personnel Management “to divide an annuity supplement only if expressly provided for in a court order.” Judge Prost authored an opinion for the Federal Circuit affirming the judgment. In particular, the court held “that OPM cannot divide a retiree’s annuity supplement unless the division of the supplement is expressly provided for in a court order.” See our our opinion summary for more information.
Argument Recaps
Since our last update, the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in four cases that attracted at least one amicus brief.
C.R. Bard, Inc. v. AngioDynamics, Inc.
In this patent case, C.R. Bard challenges rulings concerning patent eligibility, definiteness, and anticipation, among other issues. Judges Lourie, Reyna, and Chen heard the oral argument. Check out our argument recap for more details.
Entropic Communications, LLC v. Charter Communications, Inc.
In this patent case, Entropic Communications challenges a district court’s denial of its motion to intervene and unseal judicial records, raising the question of whether the district court abused its discretion. Judges Lourie, Bryson, and Chen heard the orgal argument. Check out our argument recap for more details.
REGENXBIO Inc. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.
In this patent case, REGENXBIO raises questions relating to eligibility of a genetically engineered cultured host cell that contains nucleic acid sequences from at least two different organisms spliced together into a single molecule. This case asks whether a district court erred in holding patent claims ineligible because the inventors merely “combined natural products and put them in a host cell.” Judges Dyk, Hughes, and Stoll heard the oral argument. Check out our argument recap for more details.
Arlton v. AeroVironment, Inc.
In this patent case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a district court’s summary judgment that “that Plaintiffs’ claim for patent infringement is barred by [28 U.S.C.] § 1498” and its denial of their motion for leave to file a first amended complaint. This case raises several questions, most prominently questions concerning patent infringement and the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1498. Judges Prost, Cunningham, and Stark heard the oral argument. Check out our argument recap for more details.
Upcoming Arguments
Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Oath Holdings Inc.
In this case, Arendi appeals a judgment of a district court, raising questions concerning patent eligibility, claim construction, indefiniteness, and infringement. Check out our argument preview for more information.
In re United States I
In this case, the United States on behalf of the International Trade Commission appeals a judgment of the Court of International Trade. The United States argues the CIT abused its discretion in denying a joint motion to redact business proprietary information submitted to the Commission under a promise of confidentiality. Check out our argument preview for more information.
In re United States II
In this case, the International Trade Commission petitions the Federal Circuit to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Court of International Trade to retain the Commission’s designation of certain information as business proprietary information and to vacate a related opinion and order. Check out our argument preview for more information.
Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission
In this trademark case, Crocs appeals a denial of a general exclusion order by the International Trade Commission. Check out our argument preview for more information.
Micron Technology Inc. v. Longhorn IP LLC
In this patent case, Longhorn IP and Katana Silicon Technologies appeal from a district court’s imposition of bonds they say effectively preclude them from prosecuting claims for patent infringement. Check out our argument preview for more information.