FedCircuitBlog

This Thursday the Federal Circuit will hear oral argument in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, a case involving challenges to the legality of President Trump’s tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. We have been monitoring it both because it is being considered en banc and because it attracted numerous amicus briefs. This is our argument preview.

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

• a report discussing how the Federal Circuit recently confirmed “the narrow nature of the path to appeal the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decisions whether to launch validity reviews”;
• a blog post highlighting how “two more amici have now weighed in . . . in a case challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) rescission of former Director Kathi Vidal’s guidance on discretionary denial”;
• a piece discussing how before a recent Federal Circuit’s decision courts wrestled “with the extent to which IPR estoppel bars patent challengers in district court litigation from raising invalidity arguments based on prior art that was or reasonably could have been raised”; and
• a blog post highlighting how “a backlog of cases before” the Merit Systems Protection Board “that had been all but cleared out earlier this year has started to build again, as the board lacks a quorum to consider appeals of decisions by the agency’s hearing officers.”

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the government filed its response brief in President Trump’s appeal challenging judgments and injunctions entered by the Court of International Trade in cases related to his tariffs. Additionally, the Federal Circuit received two new responses to petitions for en banc review filed in patent cases along with two new amicus briefs in a patent case and a takings case. Finally, the court recently denied one petition for en banc review in a patent case. Here are the details.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in Apple Inc. v. International Trade Commission, a patent case we have been following because it attracted several amicus briefs. In this case, Apple appealed from a judgment of the International Trade Commission, arguing the Commission erred in concluding that Masimo established an existing domestic industry, in concluding that five patent claims are infringed and not invalid, and in rejecting Apple’s prosecution laches defense. Judges Lourie, Reyna, and Stark heard the oral arguments. This is our argument recap.

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

• an article highlighting how the “U.S. Patent and Trademark Office urged the Federal Circuit on Friday to reject allegations that its handling of policies governing Fintiv-based discretionary denials violates due process”;
• a blog post discussing how the Federal Circuit “reversed a $106 million jury verdict” in “a decision that broadens the reach of prosecution history estoppel (and thus limits doctrine of equivalents)”; and
• an article suggesting that the Federal Circuit “took an important initial step toward recalibration” when it “mandated the retrial of a $20 million damages ruling in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC.“

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

• a post highlighting how “[s]everal amici have weighed in this week on a petition challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) recession of former USPTO Director Kathi Vidal’s guidance on discretionary denial”;
• an article examining the “courtroom showdown over President Trump’s tariffs” and how “it could still take a lot longer to permanently settle the legal question of whether the president has the authority to impose his wide-ranging tariffs”;
• a piece discussing how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is “adding an image search tool . . . to existing tools for utility patent examiners” to expand “how artificial intelligence is used in patent examination”; and
• an article covering how “Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. convinced the Federal Circuit to temporarily block MSN Pharmaceuticals Inc. from launching a generic version of blockbuster heart-failure drug Entresto while the two sides contest the need for a lengthier pause.”

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. The Court does not have any cases pending with granted petitions. With regard to pending petitions, one new petition was filed asking the Court to consider whether a district court’s actions in substantially reducing the time to trial violated the petitioner’s right to due process. In that same case, a waiver of the right to respond was filed. Waivers of the right to respond were also filed in three other cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, V.O.S. Selections filed its response brief in President Trump’s appeal challenging judgments and injunctions entered by the Court of International Trade in cases related to his tariffs. Sixteen amicus briefs were also filed in that case. Additionally, the Federal Circuit received three new petitions for en banc review in patent cases. Here are the details.

Last month, the Federal Circuit held an en banc session to hear oral argument in Percipient.AI v. United States. In this government contract case, the court is considering “who can be ‘an interested party objecting to . . . any alleged violation of statute or regulation in connection with a procurement or a proposed procurement’ under 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1)?” This is our argument recap. 

Today, the Federal Circuit announced it will hear oral argument in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump on July 31 at 10:00 a.m, with audio of the proceedings livestreamed on its YouTube channel due to high public interest. Here is the full text of the announcement.