FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade. In it, the Federal Circuit affirms the Trade Court’s judgment sustaining the Department of Commerce’s final determination in its investigation. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

Late yesterday and this morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential orders. Two deny writs of mandamus seeking to direct the District of Delaware to cancel hearings in patent cases concerning (1) disclosure of owners, members, and partners of nongovernmental entities that are parties before the district court and (2) disclosure of certain third-party funding arrangements in litigation before the district court. Two dismiss appeals. Here is text from the orders and links to the dismissals.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a government contracts case appealed from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. In it, the Federal Circuit reversed the Board’s rejection of the government’s claim that it was charged unallowable costs. The Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Western District of Virginia. Finally, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions, one in a patent case and another in a government contract case. In the patent case, the Federal Circuit concluded that a district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding a patent owner from presenting an infringement theory at trial. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential orders, one dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction and another granting a motion to dismiss. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the order dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and a link to the order granting the motion to dismiss.

Late yesterday and this morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion dismissing an interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Notably, Judge Newman dissented. The court also released two nonprecedential orders dismissing a petition for lack of jurisdiction and an appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The court also released another nonprecedential order granting a motion to dismiss.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion dismissing a case for lack of a timely notice of appeal, a nonprecedential order reviewing a sanction of counsel, a nonprecedential order summarily affirming a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, and a summary affirmance.

Late Friday and this morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. Here are the links to the dismissals.

This morning the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders. Two dismiss appeals and one denies a motion to stay a mandate. Here is \ text from the order and a link to the dismissals.

Last week, the Federal Circuit decided Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case we have been following since the court scheduled an en banc hearing. The case presents the question of the relationship between the education benefits in the Montgomery GI Bill and the Post-9/11 GI Bill, and in particular whether veterans such as Mr. Rudisill with two or more periods of qualifying military service are entitled to 48 months of benefits. The court issued a majority opinion reversing the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, which had held that veterans are entitled to 48 months of benefits when they have multiple periods of qualifying service. According to the Federal Circuit, these veterans are entitled to a maximum of 36 months of benefits. Two judges, however, issued dissenting opinions agreeing with the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here is our summary of the court’s opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. In it, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that specific patent claims are unpatentable as obvious, the sale of a generic product would not induce infringement of the patents, and the sale of the generic product would not directly infringe other patents. Notably, Judge Newman dissented without opinion. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential orders. One transfers an appeal to the Northern District of Georgia, and one denies a motion to dismiss and instead transfers an appeal to the Northern District of Ohio. Here is the introduction to the opinion and text from the orders.