FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion dismisses as moot an appeal of a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims in a veterans case. The order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the order.

Last week, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Metropolitan Area EMS Authority v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, a veterans case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case the Federal Circuit is reviewing a final rule passed by the Department of Veterans Affairs that would enable VA to pay the lesser of the actual charge or the Medicare fee schedule amount for non-contract ground transports. Judges Lourie, Stoll, and Stark heard the argument. This is our argument recap.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and five nonprecedential opinions. The first precedential opinion dismisses an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, while the second affirms a judgment of the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement case. Four of the nonprecedential opinions all affirm judgments of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, while the fifth affirms a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims in a government contract case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. A new petition was filed presenting a question about the abstract-idea exception relating to patentability. A new waiver of the right to respond was also filed in a pro se case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. The first dismisses for lack of jurisdiction an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, while the second affirms a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, four nonprecedential opinions, one nonprecedential order, and one Rule 36 judgment. The precedential opinion affirms a sua sponte order of the District of Delaware ordering a witness to appear in person for testimony regarding potential fraud on the court. The first nonprecedential opinion affirms in part and dismisses in part a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The second affirms a judgment of the District of Utah in a patent infringement case, while the third affirms a judgment of the Northern District of Georgia in a related case based on collateral estoppel. The fourth affirms a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The order is a denial of a petition for a writ of mandamus. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the order and Rule 36 judgment.

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

• a blog post regarding the D.C. district court’s dismissal of Judge Newman’s case for reinstatement to the bench, suggesting “Judge Newman deserves a parade, not this humiliation”; and
• another blog post regarding the D.C. district court’s dismissal of Judge Newman’s case for reinstatement to the bench, suggesting “one potential problem with life tenure: Sometimes judges do not know when to quit.”

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, one nonprecedential order, and three Rule 36 judgments. The precedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of International Trade, while the nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims. The order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the order and Rule 36 judgments.

Last week the Federal Circuit announced that it has released materials in its investigation related to Judge Newman. Here is the full text of last week’s announcement, with links to two recent orders of the Judicial Council.

This morning the Federal CIrcuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and one Rule 36 judgment. The precedential opinion affirms a grant of a preliminary injunction by a district court in a patent case. The first nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the second affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to Rule 36 judgment.