FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion addressing a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. That’s all folks. Here is the opinion’s introduction.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, two new responses were filed. One responds to a petition raising questions related to infringement and claim construction in design patent cases. The other responds to a petition raising a question related to admissibility of expert testimony. Two new amicus briefs were also filed supporting a petition raising questions related to the domestic industry requirement at the International Trade Commission. Finally, the court denied two petitions in cases raising questions related to obviousness, apportionment, and eligibility. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and one nonprecedential order. The opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the District of Utah. The nonprecedential order remands a case to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinion and the order.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and five nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Michigan. Both nonprecedential opinions come in patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Two of the orders deny petitions, one grants summary affirmance, one transfers an appeal, and one dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first three orders along with links to the transfer and dismissal.

Late last month, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., a case originally decided by the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court granted review to consider the following two questions:

1. “When a generic drug label fully carves out a patented use, are allegations that the generic drugmaker calls its product a ‘generic version’ and cites public information about the branded drug (e.g., sales) enough to plead induced infringement of the patented use?”
2. “Does a complaint state a claim for induced infringement of a patented method if it does not allege any instruction or other statement by the defendant that encourages, or even mentions, the patented use?”

This is our argument recap.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential opinions. One comes in a government contract case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, one comes in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware, one comes in government takings case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, one comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans, and one comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing a case appealed from the Eastern District of Louisiana. That’s it. Here is a link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. In the only pending case, a patent case addressing inducement of infringement and so-called skinny-labeling, oral argument took place in late April. As for pending petitions, since our last update, six new petitions were filed; three waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed; three briefs in opposition were filed; three reply briefs were filed; two amicus briefs were filed; and the Supreme Court denied petitions in five cases. Here are the details.

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.

Yesterday the Federal Circuit announced it will open its doors on July 3 to the public for tours, mock trials, and opportunities to speak with federal judges. Here is the full text of the announcement.