FedCircuitBlog

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

• a blog post covering how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is challenging the “rationale behind the Supreme Court’s decision in KSR v. Teleflex for certain technologies, specifically by advocating that claims to dosage regimens for pharmaceuticals should be almost per se obvious, particularly for such claims for which the pharmaceutical was itself patent protected”;
• another blog post highlighting how a joint letter from the Intellectual Property Owners Association and American Intellectual Property Law Association to Congress “asks that the USPTO be ‘exempted from executive actions that could further hinder its ability to meet its mission’”;
• a report discussing how the D.C. Circuit recently denied Judge Newman’s “request to unseal documents about her suspension for refusing to participate in an investigation into her fitness, saying such documents are confidential unless both the judge under investigation and the chief judge agree to release them”; and
• an editorial proposing “ways for the new Acting Director to fix the USPTO fast.”

This week, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Hawaiian Dredging Construction Co. v. United States, a government contract case on appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. In it, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a dismissal of a complaint seeking damages based on alleged government-caused delays in a contractor’s fulfillment of its contractual obligations. Judges Dyk, Clevenger, and Prost heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders, each dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, three nonprecedential opinions, two nonprecedential orders, and a Rule 36 summary affirmance. The lone precedential opinion comes in a patent case on appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the nonprecedential opinions all come in cases on appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board, and both of the nonprecedential orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmance and dismissals.

Late yesterday the Federal Circuit announced that, despite rain and sleet in the Washington DC area, it would open on time this morning. Here is the full text of the announcement.

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. With respect to petitions, one new petition was filed in a patent case raising questions related to eligibility and the Federal Circuit’s use of summary affirmances. The Court also received waivers of the right to respond in another patent case and a pro se case, as well as a brief in opposition in a trade case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions, three nonprecedential orders, and two Rule 36 summary affirmances. The nonprecedential opinions come in two cases on appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board and in a pro se case on appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. All three nonprecedential orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmances and dismissals.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Petitioners filed three new petitions, one presenting a question regarding waiver of alternative grounds for affirmance, one presenting a question regarding the burden of proving non-enablement in an inter partes review proceeding, and one presenting a question regarding injunctive relief pending a mandate. Additionally, the Federal Circuit issued an invitation for a response to a petition raising a question regarding the listing of patents in the Orange Book. Finally, a response was filed to the petition raising a question regarding injunctive relief pending a mandate. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and four nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in a government contract case on appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. The nonprecedential opinion comes in a case on appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Of the nonprecedential orders, one grants a motion for a summary affirmance, one denies a petition for a writ of mandamus, and two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first two orders, as well as 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:

• a news post covering how the “nomination hearing to vet Donald Trump’s pick for Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick . . . touched on several key points relevant to the intellectual property system”;
• a blog post discussing how the joint memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management requiring a return to office and hiring freeze “could significantly impact patent operations”;
• an article analyzing how the “Federal Circuit has been urged by startups and attorneys to reject calls by Google to tighten rules for admitting patent damages testimony” in the court’s upcoming en banc case; and
• a report suggesting “recent actions to purge diversity programs from the federal government and private sector could undermine one of the top objectives of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in recent years: expanding access to innovation.”

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and one nonprecedential order. Both nonprecedential opinions came in patent cases on appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The lone nonprecedential order dismissed a case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.