Argument Preview / Panel Activity

Argument Preview – Rudisill v. Wilkie

This week we are previewing four cases being argued next week at the Federal Circuit that attracted amicus briefs. Today we highlight a veterans case, Rudisill v. Wilkie. In this case, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs appeals a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, arguing it “misinterpreted the plain language of 38 U.S.C. §§ 3322 and 3327 in holding that the election provisions expressly contained therein [related to educational assistance benefits] do not apply to Mr. Rudisill because he had multiple periods of qualifying service.” This is our argument preview.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – December 2, 2020

The Federal Circuit did not publish any opinions or orders this morning.

Read More
Federal Circuit Announcement

Federal Circuit Announces Updated Rules of Practice and Fee Schedule

The Federal Circuit released an announcement today concerning two updates. First, the court announced that its Rules of Practice have been updated to reflect amendments to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 35 and 40. Second, the court announced increases to various miscellaneous court fees. Here is the text of today’s announcement.

Read More
Opinions / Panel Activity

Opinion Summary – Albright v. United States

As we reported this morning, earlier today the Federal Circuit decided Albright v. United States, a takings case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. Chief Judge Prost authored today’s unanimous panel opinion affirming the Court of Federal Claim’s conclusion that the federal government did not commit any taking under the Fifth Amendment. In particular, the courts agreed that, when the government converted a particular railroad line into a recreational trail, no taking occurred because at that time the plaintiffs-appellants did not have a property interest in the railroad line. Their predecessors-in-interest, the courts ruled, did not grant easements to the railroad line but, instead, “fee simple absolute title” ownership of the land in question. This is our opinion summary.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – December 1, 2020

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion affirming a judgment by the Court of Federal Claims rejecting takings claims based on a so-called “rails-to-trails” conversion. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

Read More
Argument Preview / Panel Activity

Argument Preview – Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC

As we reported yesterday, four cases being argued next week at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. The second one we will preview is a patent case entitled Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC. This case concerns patent law’s enablement requirement with respect to antibody claims. Amgen asserts “the district court erred in holding that any reasonable juror was required to find that Sanofi-Regeneron established non-enablement by clear-and- convincing evidence.” This is our argument preview

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – November 30, 2020

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two opinions, one precedential and one nonprecedential. In the precedential opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the Court of International Trade over a dissent by Judge Reyna. In the nonprecedential opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board invalidating patent claims as obvious in an ex parte reexamination proceeding. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Read More
Argument Preview / Panel Activity

Argument Preview – Modern Sportsman, LLC v. United States

Four cases being argued next week at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One is Modern Sportsman, LLC v. United States. In this case, former owners of bump-fire type rifle stocks assert the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives committed a taking under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. In particular, the former owners contend the ATF committed either a physical or regulatory taking by using its legislative authority to require the abandonment or total destruction of bump-fire rifle stocks. The former owners allege they complied with the ATF’s legislative rule requiring abandonment and did not receive just compensation in return. The former owners argue that the decision by the Court of Federal Claims dismissing their action should be reversed. This is our argument preview.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – November 27, 2020

The Federal Circuit did not publish any opinions or orders today given the extended Thanksgiving holiday noted in the court’s recent notice and order.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – November 26, 2020

Happy Thanksgiving! The Federal Circuit did not publish any opinions or orders this morning given the federal holiday.

Read More