FedCircuitBlog

Last month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in SAS Institute, Inc. v. World Programming Limited, a copyright case we have been following because it attracted several amicus briefs. In this case, SAS Institute appealed a decision by the Eastern District of Texas to dismiss claims of copyright infringement by World Programming. SAS contended the district court incorrectly analyzed copyrightability and incorrectly excluded witness testimony. In an opinion authored by Judge Reyna and joined by Judge Wallach, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding. Notably, Judge Newman dissented. This is our opinion summary

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Dixon v. United States, a case that concerns the application of the informal claim doctrine of a tax refund request. Dixon appeals a ruling of the Court of Federal Claims, arguing that the court erred in dismissing his claim based on subject matter jurisdiction or for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Judges Taranto, Clevenger, and Hughes heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

The Federal Circuit heard oral argument earlier this month in Jenkins v. United States, a takings case that attracted two amicus briefs. In this case, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a determination by a district court that Jenkins is not entitled to compensation for the loss of his vehicles seized during a criminal investigation. Judges Lourie, Dyk, and Stark heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

The Federal Circuit heard oral argument earlier this month in Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, a trade case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a determination by the by the Court of International Trade that the “President’s authority to modify a safeguard measure under 19 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(B) is limited solely to ‘trade-liberalizing’ modifications, and that Proclamation 10101 thus went beyond the President’s statutory authority.” Judges Lourie, Taranto, and Stark heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

The Federal Circuit heard oral argument earlier this month in Gorge Design Group LLC v. Xuansheng, a patent case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a determination by a district court that Gorge’s claims against NeoMagic were not frivolous and that NeoMagic was not entitled to its attorneys’ fees. Judges Taranto, Clevenger, and Hughes heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

Here is another update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases we highlight two dispositions for patent cases and another that addresses jurisdiction. We also highlight four new cases (a contract case, a trade case, a takings case, and a tax case), all of which are set to be argued next month, along with a patent case. Additionally, we highlight an argument recap in patent case. Here are the details.

Here is the first of two updates this week on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases we highlight a new patent case in which the court, due to a motion to expedite, heard oral argument recently. Additionally, we highlight new briefings in two patent cases as well as four recent opinions. Here are the details.

The Federal Circuit recently issued its opinion in PrimeSource Building Products, Inc. v. United States, an international trade case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the government appealed a determination by the Court of International Trade that the President exceeded his authority by issuing a proclamation outside a statutory time limitation. In an opinion authored by Judge Taranto and joined by Judges Chen and Stoll, the Federal Circuit reversed the judgment of the Court of International Trade. This is our opinion summary.

Three cases being argued in February at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Medical Components, Inc., a patent case that includes both an appeal and a cross-appeal. In this case, the Federal Circuit will review a determination by a district court that Bard’s claims are directed to patent-ineligible printed matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and, moreover, lack an inventive concept. With respect to the cross-appeal, the court will similarly consider whether MedComp’s claims are ineligible. This is our argument preview.

Three cases being argued in February at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Avadel CNS Pharmaceuticals LLC, a patent case. In it, the Federal Circuit will review a determination by a district court that Jazz must request the Food and Drug Administration remove (or “delist”) one of its patents from the FDA’s so-called Orange Book because that patent was improperly listed. This is our argument preview.