FedCircuitBlog

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. The court will convene 12 panels to consider 67 cases. Of the 67 cases, the court will hear oral argument in 44. The Federal Circuit provides access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, four cases scheduled for oral argument attracted amicus briefs. Here’s what you need to know about these four cases.

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

• an article arguing “the legal case against the Trump tariffs is strong”;
• a blog post indicating there has been a trend of “increased willingness of the Federal Circuit to reject jury verdicts, especially in situations involving potentially inadequate expert testimony”;
• an article reporting how, “[o]n the same day the federal government shut down, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced that it would permanently close its Rocky Mountain Regional Outreach Office in Denver”; and
• an article discussing how “[t]he U.S. Patent and Trademark Office laid off some employees . . . affecting around 1% of the agency’s workforce.”

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, there is no new activity in granted cases. With respect to petitions, four new petitions have been filed. Two petitions present questions related to Federal Circuit Rule 36, while two were filed in pro se cases. In addition, three new briefs in opposition and three waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit announced it will remain open for business during the lapse in federal appropriations, all scheduled arguments will proceed as scheduled, and all deadlines remain in place. Here is the full text of the announcement along with a link to the court’s related order.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, two new petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed in two related cases. Both petitions raise questions related to the law governing motions to transfer venue. The Federal Circuit also denied three petitions for en banc hearing raising questions concerning the identification of real parties in interest in inter partes review proceedings, estoppel based on inter partes review, and the test for design patent infringement. 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 commenting on “the Supreme Court’s next move” in President Trump’s tariff case;
• an article suggesting a recent Federal Circuit decision “confirms that Trump has alternate paths forward, should the Supreme Court strike down his emergency duties on most of global commerce”;
• an article suggesting a “dramatic change in how inter partes reviews are handled . . . has drawn sharp criticism from law professors and technology companies, setting up a high stakes battle at the Federal Circuit”; and
• an article highlighting how some attorneys are looking to John Squires, the newly confirmed director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “to provide clear rules and consistent practices, saying the current requirements keep changing.”

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.