FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, two new petitions were filed. One petition addresses a former military member’s entitlement to disability retirement, while the other addresses the Lanham Act’s prohibition on misrepresentations. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Tomorrow the court will hear oral argument in an en banc case challenging President Trump’s tariffs. Also, since our last update, the court received one new amicus brief in a design patent case, and it denied two petitions for en banc review in two utility patent cases. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit announced that it has released an updated calendar of its sessions in 2025-2026. Here is the full text of the announcement with a link to the updated calendar.

Yesterday, the Federal Circuit announced the release of materials in the ongoing investigation of Judge Newman’s fitness to serve on the court. The materials include expert reports, deposition transcripts, and orders of the Special Committee investigating Judge Newman. Notably, the materials also include a “Report & Recommendation” filed yesterday. As it explains, the report and recommendation “details the Committee’s findings which lead it to conclude: (i) that there is a reasonable basis to order full neuropsychological testing by a provider selected by the Committee; (ii) that Judge Newman’s continued refusal to cooperate with the Committee’s investigation by undergoing that testing constitutes continuing misconduct; and (iii) that the Judicial Council should renew the sanction of suspending Judge Newman from hearing cases for a period of one year.” Here is the full text of the announcement with links to the materials.

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

• an article covering how the Patent and Trademark Office is “requiring all parties to appear in person for hearings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board”;
• a piece discussing how “[t]he full Federal Circuit on Wednesday declined to reconsider its first-ever patent eligibility decision involving machine learning”;
• a blog post analyzing how a recent Federal Circuit decision “allowed the court to sidestep broader questions about when patent law issues arising in arbitration contexts warrant Federal Circuit review”; and
• an article suggesting a recent Federal Circuit decision “could make it easier for major brands to oppose trademark applications by market rivals.”

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.“