FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases, we highlight a new opinion in a patent infringement case, a recent oral argument in a case on appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board, a new response and reply brief filed in a patent case, and two new patent cases that attracted amicus briefs. Here are the details.

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

• an article detailing how Judge Newman “asked the full D.C. Circuit to reconsider her constitutional challenge to the law her colleagues used to suspend her from hearing new cases”;
• a blog post reflecting on how former Federal Circuit Judge O’Malley recently “offered insights into . . . the evolving patent law”; and
• a blog post suggesting the Federal Circuit took “a different analytical path” in a recent decision “focusing on the claim limitation ‘clinically proven effective.’”

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the government filed its opening brief and several amicus briefs were filed in President Trump’s tariff case. Regarding pending petitions, three new petition were filed, one in a patent case and two in pro se cases. Additionally, respondents filed waivers of the right to respond in two cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, with respect to granted petitions we have posted an opinion summary for a government contract case and an argument recap for a case addressing federal personnel law. With respect to pending petitions, two new petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed, one raising a question related to claim construction and one a question related to prosecution history estoppel. The Federal Circuit also denied petitions for en banc rehearing in two patent cases, one raising a question related to patent eligibility and one raising questions related to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52. Here are the details.

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

• a blog post reporting on V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump and how “[t]he Trump administration . . . urged the Supreme Court to uphold President Donald Trump’s power to impose sweeping tariffs”;
• a commentary discussing how “President Donald Trump’s global tariffs and his bid to oust Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook . . . are now in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court, which will decide how far he can go to reshape and control the levers of the economy”;
• a blog post explaining how “[r]ecent cases involving design patents on appeal to . . . the Federal Circuit highlight significant developments and issues”; and
• an article addressing how “the U.S. Senate has confirmed John Squires to serve as director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.”

Late last month, the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc., a patent case we have been following because it attracted five amicus briefs. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a judgment of the Northern District of California holding several patent claims invalid and two patents unenforceable based on prosecution laches. The panel, consisting of Federal Circuit Judges Lourie and Prost and District of New Jersey Chief Judge Renée Bumb, reversed in part and affirmed in part. This is our opinion summary.

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

• an article suggesting President Trump’s tariffs case “will shape US economic policy for years to come—and its effects will reach far beyond tariffs”;
• an article discussing the “legality of President Trump’s tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act”;
• an article indicating the Federal Circuit “clarified several important principles governing patent claim construction” in a series of decisions issued between March and August; and
• an article arguing “[t]he Commerce Department is mulling a change to the 235-year-old patent system that would impair American start-ups.”

On Wednesday, the Federal Circuit announced that next month it will be relocating the court’s drop box and changing the times when it will be available. Here is the text of the announcement.

Yesterday, the Federal Circuit announced proposed amendments to the Federal Circuit Rules of Practice. Among other things, the amendments would add a new section permitting an eligible law student to enter an appearance on behalf of a party with the consent of the party and a supervising attorney, as well as appear on briefs and participate in oral arguments in appropriate circumstances. The amendments would also prohibit former court employees from disclosing to new employers or potential employers the list they receive of pending cases that they may not participate in or assist with after employment at the court. The announcement includes links to the proposed amendments and an email address to submit public comments. Here is a full text to the announcement along with links to the materials.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the en banc court heard oral argument in Lesko v. United States, an employment law case. Additionally, four new en banc petitions have been filed in patent cases raising questions related to the presumption of validity, eligibility, and claim construction. A new response was filed in a case concerning the appropriate test for design-patent infringement. Finally, the court denied petitions for en banc rehearing in two patent cases. Here are the details.