FedCircuitBlog

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article predicting how “[t]wo proposed laws affecting patents may come up for vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee after the election”;
• an article discussing the Federal Circuit’s opinions in patent cases in September;
• a blog post highlighting a recent Federal Circuit decision that vacated a “denial of an anti-suit injunction in a major FRAND licensing dispute”; and
• an article reporting how a “federal judge in Minnesota recused himself from a patent case more than five years into proceedings after the Federal Circuit reversed his interpretation of a key patent term.”

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and an erratum. The first nonprecedential opinion comes in a case decided by the Court of Federal Claims involving a challenge to a decision of the Board for Correction of Naval Records. The second nonprecedential opinion comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the erratum.

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. The court will convene 13 panels to hear 63 cases. Of the 63 cases, the court will hear oral argument in 41 cases. The Federal Circuit provides access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, three cases scheduled for oral argument attracted amicus briefs. Here’s what you need to know about these three cases.

As we have reported, three cases being argued at the Federal Circuit in November attracted amicus briefs. One of these cases is Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC. In it, Teva challenges a district court’s injunction requiring it to delist five patents from the Food and Drug Administration’s Orange Book. This is our argument preview.

Today the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and one nonprecedential order. One of the opinions comes in a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, which dismissed various claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and granted judgment on the record with respect to other claims. The second and third opinions come in related patent infringement cases. The nonprecedential order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Happy Halloween! Yesterday afternoon, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders, both of which were dismissals. This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions. Two come in patent cases, while the third comes in a veterans case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, the petitioner filed his reply brief in Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, a case originating at the Merit Systems Protection Board. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed. One comes in a patent case raising questions related to summary judgment and Rule 36 summary affirmances. The other comes in a pro se case. Finally, one new reply in support of a petition was filed in another patent case raising a question related to the abstract idea exception to patent eligibility. Here are the details.

As we have highlighted, three cases scheduled to be argued in November at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is ATS Ford Drive Investment, LLC v. United States, a case involving a taking claim. In this case, ATS Ford Drive Investment appeals a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, which granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of the government. This is our argument preview.

Yesterday afternoon, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential order that dismissed a patent case. This morning the Federal Circuit did not post any opinions or orders. Here is a link to yesterday’s dismissal.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include a new petition raising a question related to the Federal Circuit’s review of the grant of a motion for attorneys’ fees. Additionally, the court invited a response to a petition raising questions regarding the written description requirement and obvious-type double patenting. Finally, the court denied a petition presenting a question regarding the effect of a remand overturning a holding of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on which a patent owner relied in drafting amended claims. Here are the details.