FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case addressing the court’s appellate jurisdiction. The court also released a related order transferring the appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Here is the introduction to the opinion and text from the order.

Last week, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in DiMasi v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, a pro se vaccine case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a determination by the Court of Federal Claims that a “Special Master’s denial of relief from judgment was not an abuse of discretion.” Notably, after the pro se petitioner filed informal briefs, the court issued an order appointing two attorneys to serve jointly as amicus curiae in support of the pro se petitioner’s appeal and to present oral argument. In an opinion authored by Judge Taranto and joined by Judges Prost and Moore, the Federal Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. This is our opinion summary.

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

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

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case holding that a failure to provide access to redacted information was a violation of due process. Late yesterday and this morning, the court also released four nonprecedential orders, one granting a motion to voluntarily dismiss a cross-appeal, one dismissing an appeal as untimely, and two dismissing appeals. Here is the introduction to the opinion, text from the grant of the motion to voluntarily dismiss and the dismissal for untimeliness, and links to the other dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released an erratum in a pro se vaccine case we have been tracking because it attracted an amicus brief. Here is the link to the erratum.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two opinions. Specifically, the court released a precedential opinion in a veterans case addressing whether the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims properly determined that no remand to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals was required when denying a plaintiff’s claim. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion in a pro se case in which the Court of Federal Claims dismissed a plaintiff’s case for failure to state a claim. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two opinions: a precedential opinion in a patent case addressing infringement and anticipation and a nonprecedential opinion in a pro se vaccine case we have been tracking because it attracted an amicus brief. Late last Friday, the court also released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Late last month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Jenkins v. United States, a takings case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a district court’s conclusion that it did not have jurisdiction over a due process claim and its grant of the government’s motion for summary judgment on a takings claim related to the seizure and withholding of vehicles as the result of a drug conspiracy investigation. In an opinion authored by Judge Dyk and joined by Judges Lourie and Stark, the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part. In particular, the court held that “there is no police power exception that insulates the United States from takings liability for the period after seized property is no longer needed for criminal proceedings.” This is our opinion summary.

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