Here is an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases have attracted 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 three recent opinions, four recent orders, and one new case. Here are the details.
Opinions and Orders
Since our last update, Federal Circuit panels issued opinions in two patent cases and one trade case that attracted amicus briefs. Four additional panels also released orders in cases that attracted amicus briefs.
C.R. Bard, Inc. v. AngioDynamics, Inc.
The Federal Circuit issued a per curiam opinion in this patent case, which we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit addressed a district court’s grant of judgment as a matter of law of anticipation of asserted claims. A panel of the court consisting of Judges Lourie, Reyna, and Chen affirmed the district court’s judgment. See our opinion summary for more information.
Entropic Communications, LLC v. Charter Communications, Inc.
We have been following this case because it attracted three amicus briefs. In it, the Federal Circuit reviewed a decision of the Eastern District of Texas to deny leave for a third party to intervene and seek the unsealing of various filings. In an opinion authored by Judge Bryson, the panel, consisting of Judges Lourie, Bryson, and Chen, dismissed the appeal, holding that the district court did not abuse its broad discretion in denying the third party’s motion for permissive intervention. See our opinion summary for more information.
Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission
The Federal Circuit also released its opinion in this trademark case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed the International Trade Commission’s finding of no violation as to one set of parties (the “Active Respondents”) and the Commission’s entry of a limited exclusion order against another set of parties (the “Defaulting Respondents”). In an opinion authored by Judge Stoll, a panel of the court consisting of Judges Lourie, Stoll, and Chen dismissed the appeal in part and affirmed the Commission’s decision in part. See our opinion summary for more information.
In re Comcast Cable Communications, LLC
In this patent case, the Federal Circuit issued an order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus. The petition presented a question whether venue is proper when a patent owner fails to establish that every step of a patented method was performed in a judicial district. The petition attracted one amicus brief. In an order authored per curiam, Judges Prost, Chen, and Hughes denied the petition. See our order summary for more information.
In re Google LLC
The Federal Circuit also denied a petition for a writ of mandamus in this patent case, which also attracted an amicus brief. Google filed the petition seeking to vacate a decision by the Patent and Trademark Office denying its petitions for inter partes review and to require the agency to reconsider its petitions without relying on any “settled expectations” rule. In an order authored by Judge Wallach, the panel, consisting of Judges Lourie, Wallach, and Stoll, denied the petition. See our order summary for more information.
Mid Continent Steel & Wire, Inc. v. United States
The Federal Circuit issued an order in this trade case we have been following because it attracted two amicus briefs. Before the Court reached a decision, the United States voluntarily moved to remand the case. In a per curiam order, Judges Taranto, Bryson, and Cunningham granted the motion and remanded the case to the Court of International Trade. See our order summary for more information.
In re Maplebear Inc.
The Federal Circuit issued a short order dismissing a petition for a writ of mandamus after considering Maplebear’s unopposed motion to dismiss its petition. No order summary is available, as the court provided no analysis.
New Case
Since our last update, one case attracted amicus briefs.
In re Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.
In this case, Volkswagen filed a petition for a writ of mandamus presenting the following question:
- “Whether Congress violated the nondelegation doctrine, and hence the separation of powers principle of the Constitution, by granting to the Director of the USPTO unbounded discretion to deny institution of inter partes review, even when the petition otherwise meets the requirements for institution.”
One amicus brief was filed in support of Volkswagen and the petition: