FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and seven nonprecedential orders. The opinion comes in a inter partes review proceeding appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The first order denies a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Western District of Texas to transfer a case or, in the alternative, to stay proceedings pending a ruling on a motion to dismiss for improper venue and lack of personal jurisdiction. The second order vacates and remands a district court judgment in light of a recent decision of the Supreme Court. The third transfers an appeal to the Sixth Circuit. The fourth grants a joint motion to remand a case to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Two of the remaining orders are dismissals, and the last is an erratum. Here are the introductions to the opinion and first four orders and links to the remaining three orders.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in AliveCor, Inc. v. Apple Inc., a patent case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case the Federal Circuit is reviewing a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which held several of AliveCor’s patents to be invalid as obvious. Judges Hughs, Linn, and Stark heard the argument. This is our argument recap.

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

• an article discussing the impact that the elimination of Chevron deference may have on the Federal Circuit’s oversight in the areas of its jurisdiction; and
• an article reporting how “General Motors is close to settling LKQ Corp.’s challenge to its design patent” in light of the “Federal Circuit’s decision to throw out the more-than 40-year-old design patent obviousness test in favor of a more relaxed framework.”

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order.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 The nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims in a veterans case.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.”