FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case that reverses a district court and finds all asserted claims invalid for lack of eligibility. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential opinions, one in another patent case appealed from another district court and another in a pro se case appealed from the Court of Veterans Appeals. The Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential order transferring a case, an errata, and a Rule 36 summary affirmance. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the transfer, errata, and summary affirmance.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions and three Rule 36 judgments. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in patent infringement cases appealed from district courts, while the other two come in appeals of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the judgments and dismissal.

Last month, the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, a trademark case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed the International Trade Commission’s finding of no violation as to one set of parties (the “Active Respondents”) and the Commission’s entry of a limited exclusion order against another set of parties (the “Defaulting Respondents”). In an opinion authored by Judge Stoll, a panel of the court consisting of Judges Lourie, Stoll, and Chen dismissed the appeal in part and affirmed the Commission’s decision in part. This is our opinion summary.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, three nonprecedential opinions, and two nonprecedential orders. One of the precedential opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims; the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in patent infringement cases decided by district courts; the other comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Both orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders.

Last week, the Federal Circuit issued an order in In re Google LLC, a case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, Google filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to vacate a decision by the Patent and Trademark Office denying its petitions for inter partes review and to require the agency to reconsider its petitions without relying on any “settled expectations” rule. In an order authored by Judge Wallach, the panel, consisting of Judges Lourie, Wallach, and Stoll, denied the petition. This is our summary of the order.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. One precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in a patent infringement case decided by a district court, and the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. Two of the orders dismiss appeals. The remaining order is a sue sponte order recalling a mandate for the limited purpose of correcting a misstatement in the opinion. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the order recalling the mandate, along with links to the dismissals.

In December, the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Entropic Communications, LLC v. Charter Communications, Inc., a patent case we have been following because it attracted three amicus briefs. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a decision of the Eastern District of Texas to deny leave for a third party to intervene and seek the unsealing of various filings. In an opinion authored by Judge Bryson, the panel, consisting of Judges Lourie, Bryson, and Chen, dismissed the appeal, holding that the district court did not abuse its broad discretion in denying the third party’s motion for permissive intervention.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and two Rule 36 judgments. One of the opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the other comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the judgments and dismissal.

In December, the Federal Circuit issued an order in Mid Continent Steel & Wire, Inc. v. United States, a trade case we have been following because it attracted two amicus briefs. Before the Court reached a decision, the United States voluntarily moved to remand the case. In a per curiam order, Judges Taranto, Bryson, and Cunningham granted the motion and remanded the case to the Court of International Trade. Here is a summary of the order.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three precedential opinions, four nonprecedential orders, and a Rule 36 judgment. One of the opinions comes in a design patent case and includes a dissent by Chief Judge Moore. The other two opinions come in related matters, trade cases challenging decisions of the Court of International Trade. As for the nonprecedential orders, one grants a motion for remand while the others are all dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the order granting remand, along with links the dismissals and Rule 36 judgment.