FedCircuitBlog

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

• an article discussing how the Federal Circuit “recently clarified what prior art may be part of a ‘ground’ in an [inter partes review] and therefore subject to IPR estoppel”;
• a blog post on analyzing “several dozen new discretionary denials” issued by U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart last week;
• a piece discussing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s new “[i]nterim processes for [Patent Trial and Appeal Board] Workload Management”; and
• an article reporting on how Radian Memory Systems LLC “withdrew its injunction motion seeking to block certain Samsung Electronics Co. products several weeks after the Trump administration filed a rare statement of interest in the case.”

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

• a piece suggesting recent decisions by Acting U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director Coke Morgan Stewart “provide helpful guidance” on how the Patent Trial and Appeal Board will interpret and apply new discretionary denial procedures;
• a post criticizing Stewart for having “inundated patent litigators in May and June with dozens of rulings altering the landscape of discretionary denials at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board”;
• an article discussing how “Congress is considering a bill that would effectively overturn” Supreme Court decisions dealing with patent protections, thus “[empowering] US innovators to compete with their rivals in China and Europe on a level playing field”; and
• a blog post indicating “[a]n important recent development in pharmaceutical patent law is the Federal Circuit’s embrace of . . . infringement by drug label.”

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the parties filed their en banc briefs in a pending case raising questions related to statutory interpretation and agency deference in the context of a regulation adopted by the Office of Personnel Management related to overtime pay. Two amicus briefs were also filed 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 invited a response from appellants in two patent cases and denied three petitions. 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 discussing how administrative judges at the Merit Systems Protection Board have “seen a flood of new cases land on their dockets, causing their caseloads to increase by the week;”
• a blog post focusing on United States Patent and Trademark Office Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart’s “newly implemented ‘settled expectations’ doctrine that treats patent age as a primary factor for denying institution;”
• a piece claiming “acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart’s discretionary denial in the iRhythm Technologies Inc. v. Welch Allyn Inc. cases on June 6 has sent shockwaves through the patent litigation community;” and
• an article maintaining “[p]roposed legislation to change the process adjudicating patent infringement in cases involving ‘skinny labels’ is a solution in search of a problem.”

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. The court will convene 9 panels to consider 54 cases. Of the 54 cases, the court will hear oral argument in 35 cases. The Federal Circuit provides access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This Court Week, two cases scheduled for oral argument attracted amicus briefs. Here’s what you need to know about these two cases.

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

• an article examining how “[t]ech companies are embracing an unorthodox appellate procedure to challenge policy shifts expanding the US Patent and Trademark Office director’s power”;
• another article covering how advocacy groups “have thrown their support behind” a challenge to the USPTO’s retroactive application of “a decision withdrawing earlier guidance on when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board should not review patent challenges”;
• a post discussing how “certain comments” by U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director nominee John Squires “during his Senate Judiciary Confirmation hearing . . . could reflect alignment not only with Acting Director Stewart, but with Congress’s objective when it passed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act”;
• a blog post criticizing a recent Federal Circuit decision for offering “a concerning example of the Federal Circuit departing from well-established patent claim construction doctrine”; and
• a piece covering how “James Woodruff II, Trump’s nominee” for the Merit Systems Protection Board, saw his nomination advance out of a Senate committee “on an 8-4 vote.”

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, the Court called for the views of the Solicitor General in a patent case involving so-called skinny labels, two waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in two related patent cases, and the Court denied two petitions in patent cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the government filed its opening brief in President Trump’s appeal challenging the judgments and injunctions entered by the Court of International Trade in cases related to his tariffs. Two amicus briefs were also filed in the same case. Additionally, the Federal Circuit received two new petitions for en banc review, one in a patent case appealed from a district court and one in a pro se case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Lastly, the Federal Circuit recently denied two petitions for en banc rehearing. 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 piece suggesting “[r]ecent Trump Administration actions point to enhanced support for patent rights”;
• a report analyzing a “dramatic increase in denials of Patent Trial and Appeal Board petitions” following guidance issued on March 24;
• a post discussing how the Patent Trial and Appeal Board “on Thursday designated as informative a Director Review decision,” in which “Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart said the Board abused its discretion by instituting two petitions for inter partes review (IPR) challenging the same claims”; and
• an article discussing how “[t]he U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will establish its new Southeast Regional Outreach office at its Alexandria headquarters,” which reverses “a previous decision to locate the facility in Atlanta.”

Here is this month’s 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 issued in a patent case resolving a dispute related to claim construction, a new amicus brief in a patent case addressing discretionarily denials of petitions for inter partes review based on parallel district court litigation, a response brief in a patent case involving a dispute related to claim construction, and an intervenor brief filed by the Acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in a case involving an appeal and cross-appeal from an inter partes review proceeding. Finally, the court scheduled oral argument next month in two cases that attracted amicus briefs. Here are the details.