Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:
- an article discussing how “[t]he Justice Department scrambled on Thursday to defend the legality of President Trump’s sweeping tariffs, just one day before he is set to expand his highly contested global trade war with new duties on America’s closest trading partners”;
- a post highlighting how “Acting U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director Coke Morgan Stewart dismissed most of the 50 petitions for inter partes review addressed in her latest decisions over discretionary denials”;
- a piece describing how the “full Federal Circuit on Friday rejected by an 8-2 vote Groupon Inc.’s request to reconsider its February decision reviving a patent monetization firm’s Delaware infringement suit against the e-commerce site”; and
- a blog post examining how a recent Federal Circuit decision “represents the first significant application of the court’s recent en banc EcoFactor decision to patent damages expert testimony.”
Tony Romm authored an article for the New York Times discussing how “[t]he Justice Department scrambled on Thursday to defend the legality of President Trump’s sweeping tariffs, just one day before he is set to expand his highly contested global trade war with new duties on America’s closest trading partners.” According to Romm, the oral argument heard before the Federal Circuit “underscored the financial stakes for U.S. importers — and the legal risks for the White House — as the Trump administration prepares to impose higher rates and carry out new trade deals without the explicit approval of Congress.”
Dani Kass published a post on Law 360 highlighting how “Acting U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director Coke Morgan Stewart dismissed most of the 50 petitions for inter partes review addressed in her latest decisions over discretionary denials.” Kass stated that Stewart “addressed several new concepts in her Tuesday and Thursday decisions, including indefiniteness, past business relationships, patent owners opting out, and concerns about technology space.”
Michael Shapiro wrote a piece for Bloomberg Law describing how the “full Federal Circuit on Friday rejected by an 8-2 vote Groupon Inc.’s request to reconsider its February decision reviving a patent monetization firm’s Delaware infringement suit against the e-commerce site.” As explained by Shapiro, Chief Judge Moore wrote in a concurring opinion that the panel’s “approach correctly applied the doctrine of collateral estoppel and aligned with how courts apply the doctrine in other areas of law.” For more information on this case, Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., check out our case page.
Dennis Crouch uploaded a blog post to PatentlyO examining how a recent Federal Circuit decision “represents the first significant application of the court’s recent en banc EcoFactor decision to patent damages expert testimony.” Crouch stated that the recent decision “shows how EcoFactor‘s reliability framework is raising the evidentiary bar” for damages experts to apportion license fees. He also suggested the Federal Circuit’s “increasingly stringent approach to damages evidence . . . is creating practical difficulty for patent holders seeking monetary relief.” For more information on this case, Jiaxing Super Lighting Electric Appliance, Co. v. CH Lighting Technology Co., check out our case page.