FedCircuitBlog

The Federal Circuit released its opinion earlier this month in In re United States, a companion case to another case also styled In re United States, decided the same day in a separate opinion. This trade case attracted four amicus briefs. In it, the Federal Circuit considered the International Trade Commission’s appeal from a denial by the Court of International Trade of a motion. In an opinion authored by Judge Dyk and joined by Judges Taranto and Chen, the panel dismissed the case as moot. This is our opinion summary.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and two nonprecedential orders. The opinion comes in an appeal from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which found claims not unpatentable. Notably, Judge Dyk dissented. One of the orders denies a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Patent and Trademark Office to reconsider a petition for inter partes review without relying on consideration of “settled expectations.” The other order is a dismissal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and the order denying the petition along with a link to the dismissal.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit released its opinion in In re United States, a trade case we have been following because it attracted two amicus briefs. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a petition by the International Trade Commission for a writ of mandamus to compel the Court of International Trade to retain the confidentiality of questionnaire responses and to permit the Commission to continue its practice of automatically designating questionnaire responses as confidential. In an opinion authored by Judge Dyk and joined by Judges Taranto and Chen, the Federal Circuit affirmed the order of the CIT. This is our summary of the Federal Circuit’s opinion.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. This morning, the court released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and four nonprecedential orders denying petitions for writs of mandamus. The precedential opinion comes in a trade case on appeal from the Court of International Trade. The nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent case addressing eligibility on appeal from a district court. Of the denials of petitions, three relate to petitions seeking to order the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to vacate non-institution decisions on petitions for inter partes review. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders denying petitions, along with links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and two errata. The opinion comes in an appeal of judgment of patent invalidity and a dismissal of breach-of-contract claims. It discusses when a claim’s preamble should be construed as limiting and addresses indefiniteness regarding spatial terms. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the errata.

This morning the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s holding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorize tariffs imposed by President Trump early in his administration. The Court decided the case by a vote of six to three, but it issued splintering opinions totaling 170 pages explaining various approaches to deciding the case. Chief Justice Roberts authored the opinion of the Court, which was joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson. In it, Chief Justice Roberts explains why the Court concluded that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs. Other parts of the opinion authored by Chief Justice Roberts invoke the major questions doctrine as another basis to affirm the Federal Circuit, but those parts were joined only by Justices Gorsuch and Barrett. Beyond the opinion authored by Chief Justice Roberts, every other Justice except for Justices Sotomayor and Alito issued their own opinions:

• Justice Gorsuch filed an opinion explaining why he joined in full the opinion of Chief Justice Roberts, paying particular attention to the major questions doctrine.
• Justice Barrett filed an opinion responding to criticism from Justice Gorsuch about her view of the major questions doctrine.
• Justice Kagan filed an opinion joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson concluding that the Court need not address the major questions doctrine given the Court’s statutory interpretation.
• Justice Jackson filed an opinion invoking legislative history as another basis to support the Court’s statutory interpretation.
• Justice Thomas filed an opinion discussing his view that IEEPA is consistent with separation of powers.
• Justice Kavanaugh filed an opinion joined by Justices Thomas and Alito dissenting from the holding of the Court. This was the primary dissent.

Here are introductions and relevant excerpts of the various opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and three nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in a patent infringement case and reverses a finding of patent ineligibility. Two of the three nonprecedential opinions come in appeals of decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, while the third nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims in a vaccine case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released one precedential opinion and two nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in a patent infringement case, and the key claim at issue in the dispute was a means-plus-function limitation. One of the nonprecedential opinions also comes in another patent infringement case; the other nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissal.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released four nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. Two of the opinions come in appeals of decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board involving the same parties; the other two opinions come in pro se appeals of decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board also involving the same parties. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. One of the opinions comes in a patent infringement case; the other comes in an appeal of a judgment of the Court of International Trade in a trade case. One of the orders grants the government’s motion for a summary affirmance in an appeal of final judgment of the Court of Federal Claims; the other is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first order and a link to the dismissal.