FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. With respect to petitions, no new petitions were filed with the Court, but the government waived its right to respond in a pro se case; the Solicitor General filed a brief in opposition in two patent cases and another brief in opposition was filed by a private party in one of the same cases; two amicus brief were filed in another patent case, four amicus briefs were filed in a veterans case, and one amicus brief was filed in another patent case; and the Court denied certiorari in a patent case. Here are the details. 

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions and an erratum. In the first opinion, the court dismissed an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. In the second, the court affirmed a judgment of the Patent and Trial Appeal Board. In the third, the court reversed a judgment of no invalidity in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. In the fourth, the Federal Circuit affirmed a judgment in a pro se case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the erratum.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and three nonprecedential orders. In the opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. In the nonprecedential orders, the Federal Circuit denied a petition for a writ of mandamus against Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and dismissed two appeals. Here is the introduction to the opinion, text from the first order, and links to the dismissals.

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

• an article about an “appeal seeking to revive a patent covering [a] Parkinson’s disease drug Neupro”; and
• another article discussing how four law professors argue the “Supreme Court should weigh in on whether artificial intelligence systems can produce patentable inventions.”

Late yesterday and this morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential and two nonprecedential opinions along with three nonprecedential orders. In the precedential opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the Court of International Trade. In the nonprecedential opinions, the Federal Circuit affirmed a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and affirmed-in-part and dismissed-in-part a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The three nonprecedential orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

As we reported this earlier this morning, news reports have circulated in the last 36-hours about Chief Judge Moore having concern with Judge Newman’s ability to serve as an active judge on the Federal Circuit. In response, the Federal Circuit just issued a Statement of the Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit. This statement addresses these reports and confirms that a proceeding under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act has been initiated. Along with the statement, the Judicial Council notably unsealed two orders issued by the Council to provide transparency with respect to the ongoing proceeding. Here is the full text of today’s statement with links to the relevant orders.

Late Wednesday, IPWatchdog’s Gene Quinn reported that Chief Judge Moore has filed a document identified as a “judicial complaint” under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act concerning Judge Newman. Quinn reports the document indicates Chief Judge Moore has “concern about Judge Newman’s overall ability to serve.” Late last night, Bloomberg Law’s Riddhi Setty and Michael Shapiro confirmed IPWatchdog’s report, noting some attorneys and legal academics commented that Chief Judge Moore’s allegations are “unprecedented.” Here are links to the two reports.

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

• an article about the Federal Circuit affirming a holding that “lens and filter features aren’t eligible for patent protection”;
• another article about the Federal Circuit “hand[ing] Moderna Inc a win” in a patent dispute related to “Moderna’s blockbuster COVID-19 vaccines”; and
• a blog post about “the Federal Circuit . . . interpret[ing] the claim term ‘a.’”

Late yesterday and this morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. In the precedential opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. In the nonprecedential opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. And the nonprecedential order dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. With respect to petitions, most notably the Solicitor General filed an amicus brief expressing the view of the United States that the Court should grant review in two patent cases. No new petitions were filed, but the government waived its right to respond to two petitions and a party filed a supplemental brief in response to the Solicitor General’s amicus brief recommending the Court grant review in a patent case raising a question about so-called skinny labelling. Here are the details.