FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one nonprecedential Rule 36 judgment. Here is the judgment.

Here is this month’s update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these patent cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases we highlight one disposition, one new case, two recent oral arguments, and one upcoming oral argument.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one precedential opinion in a takings case and one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued three nonprecedential orders: one granting two petitions to appeal an interlocutory order certified by the Court of Federal Claims; one denying a petition for a writ of mandamus to order a district court to transfer a case; and one denying a petition for a writ of prohibition against the Court of Federal Claims. Here is text from the orders.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one precedential opinion in a patent case and one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include new petitions filed in three cases raising questions related to standing, obviousness, and eligibility; a new invitation for a response in a case raising questions related to obviousness; two new amicus briefs in cases raising questions related to claim construction, joinder, and deference to Precedential Opinion Panels; and the denial of seven petitions raising questions related to claim construction, eligibility, novelty, non-obviousness, and the Appointments Clause. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one nonprecedential opinion in a Merit Systems Protection Board case, one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case, and one nonprecedential order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus related to a motion to transfer. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the text of the order.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions in government contracts cases, one precedential opinion in a trade case, and one nonprecedential opinion in a Merit Systems Protection Board case. The court also issued six nonprecedential Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the Rule 36 judgments.

This month the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in two related cases that attracted amicus briefs, Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. v. Alkem Laboratories Limited. In these cases, the court confronted breach of contract and patent infringement claims against two different alleged infringers–Mylan and Alkem. As we noted in our argument preview, Takeda argues that Section 1.2(d) of license agreements with the accused infringers does not allow for the production of generic versions of Takeda’s patented product at this time. Mylan and Alkem, along with the district court, disagree. The Federal Circuit consolidated the cases for argument purposes only, and the parties presented their arguments to a panel including Chief Judge Prost and Judges Newman and Hughes. This is our argument recap.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one precedential opinion in a government contract case, two nonprecedential opinions in patent cases, two nonprecedential opinions in veterans cases, and one nonprecedential erratum. The court also issued two nonprecedential Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions, the text of the erratum, and the Rule 36 judgments.