FedCircuitBlog

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order in the cases challenging President Trump’s tarrifs. The order grants a motion to immediately issue mandates in the appeals. This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and one Rule 36 judgment. One of the opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeals Board in an inter partes review proceeding. The other opinion comes in pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to yesterday’s order and today’s opinions and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and one nonprecedential order. The opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims in a vaccine case. The order dismisses an appeal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the dismissal.

Early this month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Arlton v. AeroVironment, Inc., a patent case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Arltons appealed from a summary judgment entered by the Central District of California, which held that AeroVironment could not be held liable for infringement. AeroVironment cross-appealed the district court’s denial of its motion for attorneys’ fees. In an opinion authored by Judge Stark and joined by Judges Prost and Cunningham, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court. This is our summary of the Federal Circuit’s opinion.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and two nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, it includes an opinion concurring-in-part and dissenting-in-part filed by Judge Dyk. The other nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. One of the orders rules on a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board; the other rules on a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Patent and Trademark Office to to vacate non-institution decisions and reconsider petitions for inter partes review without relying on time-to-trial as a factor. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case and vacates a summary judgment of inequitable conduct and a summary judgment of no Walker Process fraud. The nonprecedential opinion comes in another patent case and affirms a summary judgement of patent ineligibility. The order dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

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.