Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released two precedential opinions and one nonprecedential opinion. One of the precedential opinions comes in a case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans claims, and the second comes in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. The nonprecedential opinion comes in another patent case appealed form the Northern District of California. Here are the introductions to the opinions as well as a link to the dismissal.
Davis v. Collins (Precedential)
Mr. Leon Davis seeks review of a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims dismissing his appeal of a Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. Because the Veterans Court committed no legal error in determining its jurisdiction, and because we lack jurisdiction over Mr. Davis’s remaining arguments, we affirm-in-part and dismiss-in-part.
A.L.M. Holding Co. v. Zydex Industries Private Ltd. (Precedential)
A.L.M. Holding Company (A.L.M.) and Ergon Asphalt & Emulsions, Inc. (Ergon) (collectively, Plaintiff) appeal from a decision of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware dismissing their patent infringement suit against Zydex Industries Private Ltd. and Zydex Inc. (collectively, Defendant) for lack of constitutional standing. A.L.M. Holding Co. v. Zydex Indus. Priv. Ltd., No. 1:24-cv00363-JPM, 2024 WL 5276676, at *1 (D. Del. Nov. 25, 2024) (Decision). Prior to filing suit, Plaintiff licensed several rights under the asserted patents to an exclusive licensee but retained others, including the right to sue third parties for patent infringement, a right that was not rendered illusory by the rights granted to the licensee. Because Plaintiff retained an exclusionary right sufficient to satisfy the “irreducible constitutional minimum of standing,” we reverse and remand.
Recor Medical, Inc. v. Medtronic Ireland Manufacturing Unlimited Co. (Nonprecedential)
Medtronic Ireland Manufacturing Unlimited Co. (Medtronic Ireland) appeals from a decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissing its counterclaims of patent infringement against Recor Medical, Inc. (Recor) for lack of constitutional standing. Recor Med., Inc. v. Medtronic Ireland Mfg. Unlimited Co., No. 22-CV-03072-TLT, 2025 WL 2272414, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 7, 2025) (Decision). Prior to filing suit, Medtronic Ireland licensed several rights under the asserted patents to an exclusive licensee, but retained others, including the right to sue third parties for patent infringement. In a precedential opinion we issued today in a different appeal addressing constitutional standing, A.L.M. Holding Co. v. Zydex Industries Private Ltd., No. 25-1317 (Fed. Cir. May 18, 2026), we held that the patent owner in that case had constitutional standing because it retained a right to sue for patent infringement that was not rendered illusory by the rights it granted to its licensee. Because Medtronic Ireland’s retained rights are materially the same as the patent owner’s in A.L.M., we hold that Medtronic Ireland retained an exclusionary right sufficient to satisfy the “irreducible constitutional minimum of standing,” and we reverse and remand.