FedCircuitBlog

The Federal Circuit did not publish any opinions this morning on its website. The court, however, did issue a nonprecedential order on January 21 that went uncovered on the blog. In the order, the court denied a request for a writ of mandamus blocking the transfer of a patent case from Austin to Waco, Texas. Here is text from that order.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a veterans case where the court concluded it lacked jurisdiction. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued three nonprecedential opinions: two in patent cases and one in an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Additionally, the court issued an order transferring a petition for a writ of mandamus to the Eleventh Circuit. Finally, the court issued one Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions of the opinions, text from the order, and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

The Federal Circuit did not publish any opinions or orders this morning on its website. As previously announced, the court is closed today in observance of Inauguration Day.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one precedential opinion in a case involving an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Additionally, the Federal Circuit issued four nonprecedential opinions in patent cases, with three of these cases involving the same parties. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

The Federal Circuit did not publish any opinions or orders on its website this morning. The court is closed today in observance of the Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., a federal holiday.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in veterans cases. 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This morning, the Federal Circuit issued one nonprecedential opinion in a vaccine case. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued five nonprecedential opinions: two in patent cases, one in a veterans case, one in a government contract case, and one in a trademark case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Yesterday, the Federal Circuit decided Veterans4You, Inc. v. United States, a veterans case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. Judge Clevenger authored a unanimous panel opinion reversing the Court of Federal Claim’s conclusion that the “printing mandate” of 44 U.S.C. § 501 applied to a solicitation at issue in the case and obligated Veterans Affairs to route the solicitation through Government Publishing Office. The Federal Circuit agreed with Veterans4You’s argument that, instead, § 501 applies only to the production of written or graphic published materials. According to the Federal Circuit, because the solicited goods at issue in this case did not fall within this category of materials, they do not fall within the printing mandate. This is our opinion summary.