FedCircuitBlog

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. The court will convene five panels to consider 29 cases. Of the 29 cases, the court will hear oral argument in 19 cases. The Federal Circuit provides access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, one case scheduled for oral argument attracted an amicus brief. Here’s what you need to know about this case.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals in patent cases. This morning, the court released two precedential opinions. One comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and one comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Additionally, the Federal Circuit released a precedential order denying en banc review in a patent case. Notably, Chief Judge Moore and Judge Stoll concurred and Judges Dyk and Hughes dissented from the decision to deny en banc review. Finally, the court issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case and two nonprecedential orders, one denying a petition for a writ of mandamus in a patent case and one dismissing a case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders and links to the dismissals.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article noting how the Federal Circuit “said on Monday that it would extend its suspension of 98-year-old judge Pauline Newman for another year”;
• a piece discussing how “[t]he Trump administration’s trade policy faces a critical test” this week as the Federal Circuit was “scheduled to hear oral arguments . . . in V.O.S. Selections v. Trump” yesterday;
• a report detailing how “[t]he Trump administration is considering a plan to raise tens of billions of dollars with a new fee that would transform the patent system”;
• an article describing how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office “on Tuesday ordered administrative patent judges to address all grounds raised in America Invents Act petitions when issuing their final decisions”; and
• a blog post discussing how “18 Republican Senators asked the Trump Administration . . . to fill the vacant position of Chief Innovation and Intellectual Property Negotiator.”

There is one case being argued in August at the Federal Circuit that attracted an amicus brief. The case, Director of the Office of Personnel Management v. Moulton, relates to the apportionment of federal employee retirement annuity supplements pursuant to court orders, for example as a result of divorce decrees. The Director of the Office of Personnel Management asks the court to review whether the Merit Systems Protection Board “misinterpreted 5 U.S.C. § 8421(c) by concluding that OPM cannot divide the annuity supplement at all, unless the division of the annuity supplement is expressly provided for in a court order.” This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a takings case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, and two nonprecedential orders in patent cases appealed from the Western District of Texas. Here are the introductions to the opinion and orders.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, two new petitions were filed. One petition addresses a former military member’s entitlement to disability retirement, while the other addresses the Lanham Act’s prohibition on misrepresentations. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released an errata for a veterans case decided earlier this July. Here is a link to the errata.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Tomorrow the court will hear oral argument in an en banc case challenging President Trump’s tariffs. Also, since our last update, the court received one new amicus brief in a design patent case, and it denied two petitions for en banc review in two utility patent cases. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit announced that it has released an updated calendar of its sessions in 2025-2026. Here is the full text of the announcement with a link to the updated calendar.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in a patent case we have been following because it attracted multiple amicus briefs. The case, Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc., raises questions concerning prosecution laches, the written description requirement, and the boundaries of judicial discretion at trial. Judges Prost, Reyna, and Hughes heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.