FedCircuitBlog

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a trademark case appealed from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The court also issued a nonprecedential order denying as moot a petition for a writ of mandamus directing the Eastern District of Texas to rule on a motion to dismiss or transfer venue. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The opinion addresses the denial of a motion for reconsideration by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. The court also issued one erratum. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the erratum.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued four nonprecedential opinions. Two come in patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and involving the same parties. One comes in an employment case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. And one comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The Federal Circuit also issued a nonprecedential order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus to direct the Eastern District of Texas to stay proceedings in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and order.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential order granting a petition for writ of mandamus directing the District Court for Western District of Texas to transfer a patent case. Here is the introduction to the order.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions, one in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and one in a case concerning the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued three nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The second and third come in government contract cases appealed from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals and the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, respectively. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued three Rule 36 judgments. Here are links to the judgments.

Earlier this week the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, a patent case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. The case was argued before a panel that included Judges Newman, Schall, and Dyk. Mobility requested a remand to the Patent and Trademark Office in light of the Supreme Court’s holding in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., but it also made numerous constitutional challenges to the structure of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Judge Dyk authored the majority opinion in the case, ultimately remanding the case to the Acting Director of the Patent and Trademark Office to consider whether to grant a rehearing in light of Arthrex, but also concluding that Mobility’s constitutional arguments are without merit. Notably, Judge Newman authored an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. This is our opinion summary.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus against the U.S. Patent and Trademark. The petition requested the Federal Circuit compel the Director of the USPTO to review a board decision in an inter partes review in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. Here is the introduction to the order.