This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. One opinion addresses an appeal from the Court of International Trade. The other two opinions address appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board regarding patent claims which have been found unpatentable as obvious or anticipated. The nonprecedential orders are both dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.
Intex Recreation Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp. (Nonprecedential)
Intex Recreational Corporation (“Intex”) appeals from two decisions of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) holding that claims 1−12 and 16−23 of U.S. Patent 7,246,394 were not shown to have been unpatentable as obvious. Intex Recreational Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp., No. IPR201800872 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 11, 2019), J.A. 274−346 (“872 Decision”); Intex Recreational Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp., No. IPR2018-00873 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 18, 2019), J.A. 347−406 (“873 Decision”).
Team Worldwide Corporation (“Team Worldwide”) cross-appeals from three Board decisions holding that the same claims, or a subset thereof, were shown to have been unpatentable as obvious. Intex Recreational Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp., No. IPR2018-00870 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 12, 2019), J.A. 5−139 (“870 Decision”); Intex Recreational Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp., No. IPR2018-00871 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 12, 2019), J.A. 140−273 (“871 Decision”); Intex Recreational Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp., No. IPR201800874 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 25, 2019), J.A. 407−545 (“874 Decision”).
For the following reasons, we affirm the Board’s holding in its 874 Decision, raised on cross-appeal by Team Worldwide, that the challenged claims in the ’394 patent were shown to have been obvious in view of U.S. Patents 7,039,972 (“Chaffee”) and 6,698,046 (“Wu”). Because of that affirmance, we do not address the Board’s other holdings raised on cross-appeal by Team Worldwide, or those appealed by Intex. The disposition in the 874 decision regarding the ’394 claims invalidates all the claims at issue.
Team Worldwide Corp. v. Intex Recreation Corp. (Nonprecedential)
Team Worldwide Corporation (“Team Worldwide”) appeals from a decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) holding that claims 1, 7, and 11−14 of U.S. Patent 7,346,950 are unpatentable as anticipated by U.S. Patent 6,018,960 (“Parienti”) as well as U.S. Patent 7,039,972 (“Chaffee”). Intex Recreational Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp., No. IPR2018-00875 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 11, 2019), J.A. 1−96 (“Decision”). For the following reasons, we affirm.
Posco v. United States (Nonprecedential)
Appellant Nucor Corporation appeals a decision from the United States Court of International Trade sustaining the Department of Commerce’s remand determination that the government-run Korean Electric Power Corporation did not provide electricity to South Korean steel producers for less than adequate remuneration, and accordingly did not require a countervailing duty. Nucor Corporation contends that the agency’s determination is contrary to our holding in POSCO v. United States, 977 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2020), where we held that the agency erred by using a preferential-rate analysis that was eliminated by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. Because we agree with the trial court that the agency’s remand determination complies with our decision in POSCO, we affirm.