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 “appeared skeptical of U.S. President Donald Trump’s argument that a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets gave him the power to impose tariffs”;
• a piece highlighting how Acting U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director Coke Morgan Stewart “addressed rumors that the Trump administration is considering a new fee on the values of patents”;
• an article describing how Acting Director Stewart said the USPTO would no longer waive a statutory requirement that petitions for inter partes review “must specify where each element of the claim is found in the prior art patents or printed publications relied on”;
• a piece covering how the USPTO “is ramping up its internal generative AI tools and is preparing to roll out an AI training portal ‘very soon’ to help the workforce become more comfortable using GenAI”; and
• a blog post suggesting the Federal Circuit “recently expanded its doctrine associated with specification changes in family member patent applications—using minor changes in the specification [to] justify differing claim construction across a patent family.”

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

• an article discussing how “[t]he Justice Department scrambled on Thursday to defend the legality of President Trump’s sweeping tariffs, just one day before he is set to expand his highly contested global trade war with new duties on America’s closest trading partners”;
• a post highlighting how “Acting U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director Coke Morgan Stewart dismissed most of the 50 petitions for inter partes review addressed in her latest decisions over discretionary denials”;
• a piece describing how the “full Federal Circuit on Friday rejected by an 8-2 vote Groupon Inc.’s request to reconsider its February decision reviving a patent monetization firm’s Delaware infringement suit against the e-commerce site”; and
• a blog post examining how a recent Federal Circuit decision “represents the first significant application of the court’s recent en banc EcoFactor decision to patent damages expert testimony.”

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

• an article noting how the Federal Circuit “said on Monday that it would extend its suspension of 98-year-old judge Pauline Newman for another year”;
• a piece discussing how “[t]he Trump administration’s trade policy faces a critical test” this week as the Federal Circuit was “scheduled to hear oral arguments . . . in V.O.S. Selections v. Trump” yesterday;
• a report detailing how “[t]he Trump administration is considering a plan to raise tens of billions of dollars with a new fee that would transform the patent system”;
• an article describing how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office “on Tuesday ordered administrative patent judges to address all grounds raised in America Invents Act petitions when issuing their final decisions”; and
• a blog post discussing how “18 Republican Senators asked the Trump Administration . . . to fill the vacant position of Chief Innovation and Intellectual Property Negotiator.”

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.”

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 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.“

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

• a post highlighting how “[s]everal amici have weighed in this week on a petition challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) recession of former USPTO Director Kathi Vidal’s guidance on discretionary denial”;
• an article examining the “courtroom showdown over President Trump’s tariffs” and how “it could still take a lot longer to permanently settle the legal question of whether the president has the authority to impose his wide-ranging tariffs”;
• a piece discussing how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is “adding an image search tool . . . to existing tools for utility patent examiners” to expand “how artificial intelligence is used in patent examination”; and
• an article covering how “Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. convinced the Federal Circuit to temporarily block MSN Pharmaceuticals Inc. from launching a generic version of blockbuster heart-failure drug Entresto while the two sides contest the need for a lengthier pause.”

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 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.”