FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC, a patent case that presented the Court with the opportunity to decide “whether enablement is governed by the statutory requirement that the specification teach those skilled in the art to ‘make and use’ the claimed invention, 35 U.S.C. § 112, or whether it must instead enable those skilled in the art ‘to reach the full scope of claimed embodiments’ without undue experimentation—i.e., to cumulatively identify and make all or nearly all embodiments of the invention without substantial ‘time and effort.’” In a unanimous decision, the Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s judgment of invalidity and found a patent “specification must enable the full scope of the invention as defined by its claims.” Justice Gorsuch authored the Court’s opinion. This is our opinion summary.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit announced the public release of all prior orders and responses in the ongoing proceeding challenging Judge Newman’s fitness to serve as a judge on the court. Here is the full text of the notice, which includes links to the underlying documents.

As we reported this earlier this morning, news reports have circulated in the last 36-hours about Chief Judge Moore having concern with Judge Newman’s ability to serve as an active judge on the Federal Circuit. In response, the Federal Circuit just issued a Statement of the Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit. This statement addresses these reports and confirms that a proceeding under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act has been initiated. Along with the statement, the Judicial Council notably unsealed two orders issued by the Council to provide transparency with respect to the ongoing proceeding. Here is the full text of today’s statement with links to the relevant orders.

Late Wednesday, IPWatchdog’s Gene Quinn reported that Chief Judge Moore has filed a document identified as a “judicial complaint” under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act concerning Judge Newman. Quinn reports the document indicates Chief Judge Moore has “concern about Judge Newman’s overall ability to serve.” Late last night, Bloomberg Law’s Riddhi Setty and Michael Shapiro confirmed IPWatchdog’s report, noting some attorneys and legal academics commented that Chief Judge Moore’s allegations are “unprecedented.” Here are links to the two reports.

The Supreme Court heard oral argument this week in a patent case decided by the Federal Circuit, Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC. In this case, the Court is considering “[w]hether enablement is governed by the statutory requirement that the specification teach those skilled in the art to ‘make and use’ the claimed invention, 35 U.S.C. § 112, or whether it must instead enable those skilled in the art ‘to reach the full scope of claimed embodiments’ without undue experimentation—i.e., to cumulatively identify and make all or nearly all embodiments of the invention without substantial ‘time and effort.’” This is our argument recap.

Yesterday, the Federal Circuit issued a notice of Limited CM/ECF Availability on Friday, April 7, 2023 through Sunday, April 9, 2023. In it, the court announced that the court’s electronic filing system (CM/ECF) will be unavailable between Friday, April 7, 2023, at 6:00 p.m. (Eastern) through Sunday, April 9, 2023, at 6:00 p.m. (Eastern). Here is the full text of the announcement.

Yesterday, the Federal Circuit issued a Notice of Adopted Amendments to the Federal Circuit Rules of Practice. In it, the court amends 18 Federal Circuit Rules of Practice. The new amendments will take effect on March 1, 2023. Here is the full text of the announcement and a summary of the amendments.

This past Friday, the Federal Circuit issued a Notice of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Circuit Rules of Practice. The court proposes to amend eight Federal Circuit Rules of Practice and the Practice Notes to four rules. If adopted, the amendments would take effect on March 1, 2023. While there are many proposed amendments, as a highlight, proposed changes include requiring service of a paper copy of each brief and appendix on opposing counsel “unless counsel deems it unnecessary.” Friday’s notice also indicates the court “may also implement” previously proposed amendments that the court later deferred. Here is the full text of Friday’s announcement, a summary of the most recent proposed amendments, and links to the redlined copy and a clean copy of the most recent proposed amendments. Note that public comments in response to Friday’s proposed amendments must be received by the Clerk of Court on or before February 21.

Christa Laser is a professor at Cleveland State University College of Law, where she teaches intellectual property, innovation law, and other topics. Her research includes topics of patent law, federal courts, and civil procedure. She was previously a patent trial and appellate litigator at the law firms Kirkland & Ellis and WilmerHale. In the following guest blog post, she discusses her recently published article, Rethinking Patent Law’s Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction. In this article, she proposes radical changes to the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction: retaining the Federal Circuit for some appeals but, notably, returning appeals from district courts in patent cases back to the regional circuits. She also urges adoption of the Hruska Commission’s National Court of Appeals, sitting between the Supreme Court and regional circuits.

The Federal Circuit today announced that its updated Rules of Practice are now available. Today’s announcement is consistent with the court’s previous announcement about its decision to defer adoption of certain amendments. Here is the full text of today’s announcement.