FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions. The first comes in a patent case appealed from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and the second comes in a veterans case appealed from the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The Federal Circuit also issued a nonprecedential opinion in another veterans case and a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The cases address the patentability requirement of non-obviousness. The court also issued a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The court also issued two nonprecedential orders denying petitions for writs of mandamus in patent cases pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York and the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Finally, the court issued a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The opinion addresses eligibility for post-grant review based on priority dates. The court also issued a nonprecedential order in another patent case denying a petition for writ of mandamus raising a question regarding the scope of statutory estoppel based on a prior inter partes review proceeding. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential order in a patent case dismissing appeals and denying a petition for a writ of mandamus concerning a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to institute inter partes review despite the alleged applicability of a prior agreement by the patent owner to arbitrate patent validity disputes. Notably, Judge O’Malley concurred-in-part and dissented-in-part. Here are the introductions to the order and Judge O’Malley’s opinion.

On August 26 the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in MLC Intellectual Property, LLC v. Micron Technology, Inc., a patent case we have been following because it attracted three amicus briefs. Judge Stoll authored the panel’s opinion, which relates to damages law and the exclusion of expert testimony seeking to present a reasonable royalty analysis. This is our opinion summary.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued nonprecedential opinions in two pro se cases appealed from the United States Court of Federal Claims and the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The court also issued three Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions today on its website given the Labor Day holiday.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in a case addressing the jurisdiction of the United States Court of Federal Claims and in a patent case appealed from the District Court for the District of Delaware addressing claim construction. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

On August 26 the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Larson v. McDonough, a case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. The case was argued before Judges Newman, Reyna, and Hughes. The judges considered whether the court should overrule what Larson characterized as the Veterans Court’s prohibition of reviewing Board of Veterans Appeals decisions regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule of Disabilities. Judge Hughes authored the court’s opinion, which reversed and remanded the case back to the Veterans Court. This is our opinion summary.