FedCircuitBlog

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

• an article describing how “Samsung Electronics Co. and Google LLC lodged an appellate protest of Trump administration changes that have sunk more than 200 patent challenges at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office”;
• a piece considering implications of the PTAB’s announcement that “all PTAB hearings will be held in person at the USPTO’s offices, absent a showing of good cause”;
• a blog post analyzing how “[a]bout half of the patents adjudicated in district courts and at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board are found invalid”; and
• a blog post suggesting a recent Federal Circuit decision “illustrates how the Federal Circuit appears to be increasingly disregarding the jury’s role in fact finding.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent infringement case appealed from the Eastern District of New York. The Federal Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the Federal Circuit received two letters in the court’s pending en banc case involving President Trump. In addition, two petitions for en banc review were filed in patent cases raising questions related to Rule 52 evidentiary trials and patent eligibility, and the court denied a petition in another patent case raising questions related to invalidity. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion affirming in part and dismissing in part a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, seven new petitions have been filed. These new petitions raise various questions related to employment law, trademark law, free speech, procedure, and patent law. Also, two waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in a case related to military disability retirement and a pro se case. Here are the details.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in a case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. The case, Director of the Office of Personnel Management v. Moulton, raises a question relating to apportionment of federal employee retirement annuity supplements pursuant to court orders, for example, as a result of divorce decrees. This case asks whether the Merit Systems Protection Board misinterpreted 5 U.S.C. § 8421(c) by concluding that the Office of Personnel Management cannot divide annuity supplements at all, unless their division is expressly provided for in a court order. Judges Prost, Wallach, and Chen heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal in a patent case. This morning, the court released three nonprecedential opinions. Two come in patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Eastern District of Louisiana, while one comes in an antidumping case appealed from the Court of International Trade. Here are the introductions to the opinions, along with a link to the dismissal.

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

• an article highlighting how “[t]he Trump administration’s top lawyers urged a federal court . . . to uphold its sweeping global tariffs or risk ‘financial ruin’”;
• another piece discussing how the Trump Administration “sees complete disaster for the U.S. economy if its reciprocal tariffs are struck down, revealing its level of concern”;
• a post describing how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office “has introduced DesignVision, a new artificial intelligence-powered image search tool now available to design patent examiners”; and
• an article covering how the USPTO “plans to require foreign patent applicants and owners to use agency-sanctioned representatives, according to the Trump administration’s regulatory agenda update released Friday.”

Late Friday, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a pro se case and a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released a precedential opinion in a takings case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. The Federal Circuit also issued a nonprecedential opinion in a vaccine case and another nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The court affirmed the Board’s decision to dismiss an appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Here is the introduction to the opinion.