Search
Search | Sitemap Contact Sign Up

En Banc Petitions

Search By
Status
Subject
417 Petitions
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
24-1401
Case
Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a first-filed, first-issued, later-expiring patent can be invalidated by a later-filed, later-issued, earlier-expiring patent for obviousness-type double patenting.”
Appeal No.
24-1181
Case
Shilpa Pharma, Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “May the Court find a patent claim anticipated when one of the claim limitations is admittedly absent from the anticipatory reference?” 2. “May the Court redraft a patent claim by...
Appeal No.
23-2308
Case
Ball Metal Beverage Container Corp. v. Crown Packaging Technology, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “Did a panel of this Court err when it concluded that a district court held a Rule 52 evidentiary trial even though (i) the parties agree that the district...
Appeal No.
23-2138
Case
North Star Technology International Ltd. v. Latham Pool Products, Inc.
Subject
Patent2 Amici
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the undefined and standardless ‘sufficiently distinct’ test for design-patent infringement, as well as its application at the summary-judgment stage, conflicts with Gorham Co. v. White, 81 U.S. 511 (1871),...
Appeal No.
23-1639, 23-1866, 25-1276, 25-1341
Case
United Services Automobile Association v. PNC Bank N.A.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“This Court has held that, to find invalidity at Alice step two, the challenger bears the burden of proving—as ‘a question of fact’—that both the claim elements and their ‘ordered...
Appeal No.
23-1367
Case
Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) allows the petitioner in an inter partes review (‘IPR’) that has resulted in a final written decision to avoid estoppel in a civil action...
Appeal No.
23-1101
Case
EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Granted
Question(s) Presented
Did the court err in “failing to rigorously scrutinize a patentee’s reliance on supposedly comparable licenses” resulting in an “artificially inflated damages award that is divorced from market realities and...
Appeal No.
21-2348
Case
LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC
Subject
Patent3 Amici
Status
Granted
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the rigid approach to evaluating the obviousness of designs under In re Rosen, 673 F.2d 388, 391 (CCPA 1982) and Durling v. Spectrum Furniture Co., Inc., 101 F.3d 100...
Appeal No.
18-2170
Case
Bedgear, LLC v. Fredman Bros. Furniture Co.
Subject
Patent
Status
Moot
Question(s) Presented
Bedgear, LLC asserts that “[e]n banc review is necessary to secure and maintain uniformity in the Court’s decisions in all pending cases that raise the same important constitutional question whether...
Appeal No.
24-2256
Case
Golden v. United States
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
24-2148
Case
Li v. Apple Inc.
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether a prior art reference needs to include a written description to disclose a negative limitation, or whether silence constitutes such a disclosure.” 2. “Whether the panel may interpret a...
Appeal No.
24-2030, 24-2031, 24-2032, 24-2033, 24-2035, 24-2036, 24-2037, 24-2038
Case
Wakefield v. Blackboard, Inc.
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the inclusion of Judge Pauline Newman, or any judge who has a witnessed and documented state of deteriorating mental capacity is allowable in the proper application of 28 U.S.C....
Appeal No.
24-1936
Case
Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC
Subject
Patent3 Amici
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“This case presents a question that is fundamental to the Hatch-Waxman framework: what patents must be listed in the Orange Book?”
Appeal No.
24-1685
Case
Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. Salesforce, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a patent’s specification limits claims so as to require a particular feature when the specification (1) disparages prior art for omitting that feature, (2) describes ‘the invention’ as containing...
Appeal No.
24-1580
Case
Heidary v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
24-1428
Case
Huang v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
24-1202
Case
Longitude Licensing Ltd. v. Google LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Whether “[r]ehearing en banc is necessary because the panel decision conflicts with the Court’s body of § 101 precedent applying Alice and introduces uncertainty as to the role of the...
Appeal No.
24-1156, 24-1160, 24-1161, 24-1162
Case
SurfCast, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether the Panel failed to apply its own precedent in Phillips and subsequent cases when reviewing the PTAB’s claim construction.” 2. “Whether the Panel erred in upholding the PTAB’s claim...
Appeal No.
24-1133
Case
Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. Salesforce, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a patent’s specification limits claims so as to require a particular feature when the specification (1) disparages prior art for omitting that feature, (2) describes ‘the invention’ as containing...
Appeal No.
24-1061
Case
Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd.
Subject
Patent2 Amici
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Does a general disclosure that a pharmaceutical compound may be combined with any of five inactive ingredients sufficiently describe ‘picture claims’ to specific formulations that are ‘narrow’ and recite...