FedCircuitBlog

In early August, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Realtime Data LLC v. Array Networks Inc., a patent case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss for invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In an opinion by Judge Reyna joined by Judge Taranto, the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court. Judge Newman, however, filed a dissenting opinion. This is our opinion summary.

Today, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent and Trademark Office. The opinion discusses why the court affirmed the invalidation of numerous claims of three patents for obviousness. The court also released a summary affirmance under Federal Circuit Rule 36 and a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the summary affirmance and dismissal.

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

• a letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal by Fifth Circuit Judge Edith Jones defending Judge Newman;
• an article describing Judge Jones’s letter in defense of Judge Newman and Judge Jones’s relevant experience; and
• an article discussing a recent Federal Circuit decision that ended over a decade of patent infringement litigation.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit announced the release of a redacted version of a transcript from the July 13, 2023 proceeding regarding Judge Newman, as well as an order relating to the language in the redacted transcript. The transcript was released to the public at the request of Judge Newman. Judge Newman, however, objected to the insertion of the generic descriptor “cardiac condition” as a substitute for a more specific phrase describing her condition that both the Committee and Judge Newman proposed to black out. The special committee overruled Judge Newman’s objection. Here is the full text of the announcement.

Today, the Federal Circuit released six nonprecedential orders: two order the transfer of cases to a district court, two grant motions for remand, one denies a motion to transfer to a district court, and one grants unopposed motions to voluntarily dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the orders and a 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, an opening merits brief and an amicus brief were submitted in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case. Five new petitions were filed, one in a personnel case and four related to the same pro se case. Additionally, three briefs in opposition were filed, one in response to a petition raising a question related to the jurisdiction of the Court of International Trade and two in response to a petition raising a question related to patent eligibility. Finally, a reply in support of a petition was filed in a case addressing hazardous duty pay for federal employees. Here are the details.

Today, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, three nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office and addresses whether a patent is unpatentable as anticipated by, or obvious in view of, asserted prior art.  One of the nonprecedential opinions involves a pro se litigant seeking review of a final decision of the Merit System Protection Board. The second nonprecedential opinion, also litigated pro se, addresses an alleged violation of the First Amendment. The final nonprecedential opinion involves an appeal from a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision regarding the patentability of claims. The three nonprecedential orders deny petitions for writs of mandamus. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include the filing of an opening en banc brief in an en banc case reconsidering the longstanding test governing design patent obviousness and the denial of a petition raising questions related to obviousness.

Today, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and three nonprecedential orders. The first opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and addresses obviousness. The second opinion comes in another patent case appealed from a district court and addresses several issues. Two of the orders dismiss appeals for failure to pay docketing fees and one dismisses for failure to file a brief within the permitted time. Here are the introductions to the opinions 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 discussing oral arguments at the Federal Circuit in three appeals between Masimo Corp. and Apple Inc. involving “a series of Patent Trial and Appeal Board rulings that inventions described in Masimo’s patents were obvious and therefore unpatentable”;
• an article about how LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Tech. Operations holds the potential to make changes to the longstanding test for design patent obviousness; and
• an article analyzing the potential impact of a former soldier’s argument that the “U.S. Supreme Court [should] reverse a Federal Circuit decision that he claimed wrongly reduced his access to increased benefits Congress granted to wartime veterans.”