FedCircuitBlog

The Federal Circuit issued nine opinions and orders this morning:

• The court issued a precedential opinion in a veterans law case, affirming the upholding of a denial of an earlier effecting date for a service-connected disability over a dissent by Judge Newman.
• The court issued two orders and a precedential opinion in another veterans law case on remand from the Supreme Court. The first order granted panel rehearing, the panel withdrew and replaced its original opinion with a new precedential opinion, and the second order denied rehearing en banc. The new panel opinion declined to apply Auer deference to a Department of Veterans Affairs regulation and affirmed a decision of the Veterans Court, which in turn had affirmed a decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals denying an earlier effective date for a service-connected disability. Judge Reyna dissented. Notably, the order denying rehearing en banc elicited five separate concurring and dissenting opinions.
• The court issued a related nonprecedential order and precedential opinion in a trade case. The order unsealed the opinion, which affirmed the Court of International Trade’s decision to affirm the Department of Commerce’s antidumping duty order covering carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from Mexico.
• The court issued two nonprecedential opinions affirming the Court of Federal Claims in two government contract appeals involving the same parties.
• The court issued a Rule 36 summary affirmance in case appealed from the Northern District of California.

Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the orders, and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three opinions: a precedential opinion in a patent case decided by the International Trade Commission, a precedential opinion in a veterans case, and a nonprecedential opinion in a case decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions of the opinions.

The Federal Circuit again did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website. That makes four out of the last five business days without released opinions or orders.

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

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case affirming the Court of International Trade’s determination of duty-free treatment of the active ingredient in a medication for the treatment of the human immunodeficiency virus (“HIV”), a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case affirming a dismissal for lack of eligibility, a nonprecedential order unsealing the trade opinion, and an erratum. Here are are the introductions to the opinions, text from the order, and link to the erratum.

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

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

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a modified precedential order granting a motion to substitute a successor-in-interest in an appeal of an inter partes reexamination of a design patent. Compared to the original order, the modified order differs primarily in that Judge Dyk modified parts of the original order and Judge O’Malley now dissents from the grant of the motion. Here is the introduction to the modified order and the text of Judge O’Malley’s dissent.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a takings case and two nonprecedential opinions in patent cases, one affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and another dismissing an appeal for lack of constitutional standing. The court also issued a nonprecedential order granting a petition for a writ of mandamus ordering the Western District of Texas to transfer a patent infringement case. Notably, this order marked the second grant of mandamus against the Western District of Texas in the same case. The first grant of mandamus required the Western District of Texas to rule on a long-pending motion to transfer, while this second grant of mandamus requires the Western District of Texas to transfer the case.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a veterans case. Here is the introduction to the opinion.