Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an announcement reporting on the creation of a new “IP-Focused American Inn of Court named after Judge Kara F. Stoll”;
- an article describing a recent event where “[j]udges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shared insights into how they decide cases and gave career advice to students after a special session of live oral arguments at UC Law San Francisco”; and
- an article suggesting that the USPTO’s current Patent Term Adjustment rules are “subject to shifting judicial precedent and their strict application creates ‘traps’ which can subvert congressional intent.”
The Federal Circuit released an announcement reporting on the creation of a new “IP-Focused American Inn of Court named after Judge Kara F. Stoll.” According to the announcement, in September “the Kara Fernandez Stoll American Inn of Court held a naming ceremony and its first inaugural meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina, at the Charles R. Jonas United States Courthouse.” We shared the full text of the announcement on the blog yesterday.
The University of California Law San Francisco released an article describing a recent event where “[j]udges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shared insights into how they decide cases and gave career advice to students after a special session of live oral arguments at UC Law San Francisco.” The event included a “three-judge panel convened in UC Law SF’s Baxter Appellate Courtroom on Oct. 8 to hear arguments in four cases involving international trade, patent litigation, and a federal employment dispute.” Following the arguments, “law students posed questions to judges, asking how they prepare for live hearings, what they look for in written and oral arguments, and what advice they have for students looking to excel in the legal field.”
Anthony Prosser contributed an article to IP Watchdog suggesting that the USPTO’s current Patent Term Adjustment rules are “subject to shifting judicial precedent and their strict application creates ‘traps’ which can subvert congressional intent.” Prosser provides two examples that he claims explore “situations in which the current PTA rules fail both the applicant and USPTO by punishing actions that are meant to facilitate efficient patent prosecution.” Prosser suggests that “the patent community (including applicants, lawyers, patent agents, judges, the Patent Office, and even the general public), should work together to incrementally improve our system and find and fix rules that are not working as intended.”