FedCircuitBlog

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a blog post indicating a recent Federal Circuit opinion provided a “fascinating exploration of three distinct doctrines of equivalence in patent law”;
• another blog post suggesting the USPTO sits “at an inflection point that requires us to build examination capacity to achieve . . . long-term pendency goals”;
• an article discussing how President Trump’s decisions to mandate “a hiring freeze across the federal government” and require “federal government employees come back to the Office five days per week” might impact the USPTO; and
• a news update analyzing how the “Skinny Labels, Big Savings Act, introduced at the end of last year and reintroduced this month in the new Congress,” is seeking to “protect generic-drug makers from patent suits when using so-called skinny labels.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a report discussing how “Coke Morgan Stewart was sworn in as the new Deputy Undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office;”
• a piece covering how “Trading Technologies (TT) has petitioned the Supreme Court to review a Federal Circuit decision raising three significant questions about patent law and civil procedure;
• an article reporting how “[t]op Republicans on the House and Senate VA Committees are leading a bill meant to help the Department of Veterans Affairs fire poor-performing employees more quickly;” and
• a piece describing how the Federal Circuit granted an order “temporarily blocking drugmaker MSN Pharmaceuticals from launching a generic version of Novartis’ blockbuster heart-failure drug Entresto.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a blog post suggesting reasons for the ”the prevalence of filing errors and subsequent correction requirements in Federal Circuit appeals–even among the nation’s most sophisticated appellate practitioners”;
• a report covering how Chief Judge Moore “told the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Thursday that Judge Pauline Newman’s appeal of her effective removal from the [Federal Circuit] should fail because her claims do not meet the ‘exceptional circumstances’ warranted for transfer to another circuit and her constitutional challenges are precluded”;
• an article asking whether the Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo will “chip away at Federal Circuit Rule 36 summary affirmances” or even “offer a path for [Patent Trial and Appeal Board] appellants to circumvent Rule 36 altogether”; and
• a piece highlighting how the Supreme Court granted certiorari Friday to “review whether the government need only pay six years of unpaid combat-related special compensation if a veteran files a claim.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a news alert reporting how “Dish Network LLC asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review whether courts can require attorneys to pay legal fees in exceptionally frivolous patent cases”;
• a blog post analyzing a recent Federal Circuit decision where the central issue in the case “revolved around the interpretation of [35 U.S.C.] § 311(b)’s limitation that [inter partes review] challenges may be based only on ‘prior art consisting of patents or printed publications’”; and
• an article covering how the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decision “canceling trademarks claiming protection for the pink color of ceramic hip components.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a news alert suggesting decisions by the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit “have called into question the validity of broad antibody patent claims, leading some commentators to declare the death of the antibody genus claim;”
• a blog post indicating the Federal Circuit “issued a notable opinion on federal preemption of state law conversion (theft) claims and correction of inventorship;”
• a report highlighting how the Supreme Court “rejected a case asking the justices to interpret a patent-infringement safe-harbor provision in a federal statute ‘solely for uses reasonably related’ to the process [for] winning government approval of a drug or medical device;” and
• an article reporting how an “import ban on Roku Inc. streaming devices will stand after the U.S. Supreme Court turned away its challenge to the U.S. International Trade Commission’s finding Universal Electronics Inc. met the agency’s domestic-industry requirement with patented software.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article covering how Judge Pauline Newman is “pushing back” against her suspension from the bench over claims she is unfit for duty;
• a report that “[t]he D.C. Circuit doesn’t have the authority to unseal documents related to the Federal Circuit’s suspension of Judge Pauline Newman”;
• a piece highlighting “numerous interesting, precedential decisions from the Federal Circuit on a range of patent issues” in the second half of 2024; and
• an article providing “a statistical review of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decisions in patent cases during calendar year 2024.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a piece highlighting “[t]his year’s notable patent decisions from the Federal Circuit”; 
• a post discussing “several U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and Supreme Court decisions that are likely to have lasting impacts” on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; and
• an article discussing how the Federal Circuit “slashed the Municipality of Anchorage’s initially-awarded $367.4 million to a little more than $11 million.” 

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a report covering how Judge “Newman is appealing her suspension and has also filed a motion to unseal documents related to an investigation which ultimately led to her being temporarily removed from the bench”;
• an article highlighting how Judge Newman “continues to fight against a suspension from the bench that was handed over to her by colleagues who believe she is ‘mentally unfit’”;
• an article describing how “[t]wo key amicus briefs were filed on Thursday, December 12, backing Judge Pauline Newman’s appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from the dismissal of her case against the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)”; and
• an article discussing how in a recent amicus brief “six retired judges argued” that “the Federal Circuit circumvented the US Senate and dealt a blow to the independence of all federal judges when it suspended 97-year-old Judge Pauline Newman.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article discussing how Judge Newman, “the nation’s oldest active federal judge, asked the D.C. Circuit to end a suspension imposed by her colleagues that prevents her from hearing cases at the Federal Circuit”;
• remarks by retired Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul Michel on Judge Newman’s case at the D.C. Circuit;
• an article highlighting how Illinois Senator Dick Durbin and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have taken opposite sides on the PREVAIL Act; and
• an opinion piece by retired Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul Michel suggesting “lawmakers should do everything they can to pass” the PREVAIL Act “promptly.”

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article reporting how the Supreme Court recently “rejected a bid to review decisions invalidating a patent owned by a background-check software maker that had argued that an appellate judge’s suspension had hurt its case”;
• a blog post highlighting two Supreme Court petitions the author suggests “provide [an] opportunity to address a longstanding problem with the Federal Circuit’s practice of issuing no-opinion summary affirmances in patent cases”; and 
• an article discussing the Federal Circuit’s decision “to rehear a high-profile decision that revived an artificial intelligence company’s protest over its exclusion from a $376.4 million procurement.”