FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Virginia, concluding that the Patent Act requires an inventor to be a natural person. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential orders. One dismisses an appeal for failure to prosecute; one grants the transfer of an appeal from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Finally, the Federal Circuit released two Rule 36 judgments and an erratum. Here is the introduction to the opinion, text from the orders, and links to the Rule 36 judgments and erratum.

Late yesterday and this morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential orders granting motions to voluntarily dismiss appeals. Here are the links to the dismissals.

This morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board; the second and third come from two separate veterans cases appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the fourth comes in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. Notably, in the patent case, Judge Dyk filed a concurring opinion. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade; a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board; and a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website.

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a government contract case appealed from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; the second comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Thales USA, Inc., a patent case we have been watching because it attracted amicus briefs. In this case, Thales appealed a district court’s denial of a motion for a preliminary injunction. Thales sought to “prevent Philips from pursuing an . . . exclusion order against Thales” at the International Trade Commission based on a commitment by Philips to license its patents on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory terms. In a relatively short precedential opinion, a Federal Circuit panel comprised of Chief Judge Moore and Judges Dyk and Chen affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction. This is our opinion summary.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Central District of California. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court, which awarded attorneys’ fees with respect to the underlying California action but not with respect to related proceedings in Delaware and before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, Judge Reyna concurred in part and dissented in part from the panel’s judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released nonprecedential opinions in two cases appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. In both cases, the Federal Circuit affirms a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Notably, both cases involve the same plaintiff. Here are the introductions to the opinions.