FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. The first opinion dismisses an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The second opinion affirms a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board, which dismissed claims for lack of jurisdiction. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and one nonprecedential order. The nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The order dismisses and appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims as moot. Here is the introduction to the opinion and link to the order.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and seven nonprecedential orders. The first opinion affirms a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the second opinion affirms in part, reverses in part, and remands a patent and trade secret case appealed from the District of Rhode Island. Three of the orders are dismissals and four are Rule 36 summary affirmances. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals and summary affirmances.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and three nonprecedential orders. The opinion affirms a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board, and all the orders are dismissals. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the orders.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion reverses and remands in a Tucker Act case decided by the Court of Federal Claims. The first nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, which dismissed a complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The second nonprecedential opinion dismisses an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. One of the orders dismisses an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board as moot, while the two other orders are Rule 36 summary affirmances. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the links to the orders.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and two Rule 36 judgments. The first opinion affirms a judgment in a pro se case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, and the second opinion dismisses an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for lack of jurisdiction. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion, four nonprecedential orders, and five nonprecedential Rule 36 judgments. The opinion dismisses an appeal in a pro se case for lack of jurisdiction. All of the orders are dismissals. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the orders and summary affirmances.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The first nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board in a pro se case, while the second dismisses an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The first nonprecedential order remands a case vacated by the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the other two orders are both dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first order and links to the dismissals.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and four nonprecedential orders. The opinion affirms a judgment of the Western District of Texas in a patent case. All four orders are dismissals. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the orders.

Last month the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc., a patent case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a judgment by the District of Delaware, which held that Norwich infringed certain patent claims but that other claims were invalid for obviousness. After Norwich amended its Abbreviated New Drug Application to remove the infringing indication, Norwich sought to modify the judgment, contending the amendment negated any possible infringement. The district court, however, denied its motion. The Federal Circuit, in an opinion authored by Judge Lourie that was joined by Judge Chen, affirmed the judgment of the district court. Judge Cunningham, however, filed a dissenting opinion. This is our opinion summary.