FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the International Trade Commission. The Federal Circuit vacated a judgment based on a claim construction adopted by the International Trade Commission and remanded the case. The court also issued a Rule 36 judgment. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued three precedential opinions. The first comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the second comes in a takings case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims; and the third comes in a military discharge case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. The Court also issued five nonprecedential opinions in various cases appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a whistleblower retaliation case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The court also issued three nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The second comes in an employment case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. And the third comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, Judge Stoll dissented-in-part from the holding in the patent case. The court also issued a nonprecedential order granting a petition for a writ of mandamus, ordering the Eastern District of Texas to require transfer of a patent case. Finally, the court issued two Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and order and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued three nonprecedential opinions. The first opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial Appeal Board, while the second and third opinions come in employment cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Finally, the court released three Rule 36 judgments and one erratum. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments and erratum.

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website in light of Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in patent case appealed from the District of California. The opinion reverses a grant of summary judgment of non-infringement based on the Federal Circuit’s claim construction. The Federal Circuit also issued a nonprecedential order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to overrule the District of New Jersey’s decision to transfer a patent case to the Western District of Texas . Finally, the Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order as well as a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. The first opinion affirms a dismissal by the Court of Federal Claims for failure to prosecute, and the second affirms a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction and failure to prosecute. The court also issued two Rule 36 judgments and one erratum. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments and erratum.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. The opinion addresses the district court’s award of damages for breach of contract claims in a patent infringement case. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The opinion affirms the denial of a 100% disability rating. The Federal Circuit also issued two Rule 36 judgments. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade. The opinion affirms the Court of International Trade’s calculation of an antidumping duty rate. Here is the introduction to the opinion.