Petitions – Fed Circuit Blog

| Sitemap Contact

Search By

Status

Subject

74 Petitions

Appeal No.

Case

Subject

Status

Question(s) Presented

In re Apple Inc.

Question(s) Presented

“[W]hether a plaintiff can defeat a transfer motion by doing nothing more than alleging that there may be likely witnesses in, or other connections to, the plaintiff’s chosen forum.”

Stuart v. Rust-Oleum Corporation

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether this Court erred by vacating and remanding this case based on an Appointments Clause challenge[] raised for the first time in a single pre-briefing motion before this Court.” 2....

Diem LLC v. BigCommerce, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

Whether the Federal Circuit’s “‘prevailing party’ jurisprudence has diverged from most sister circuits in contradiction of Supreme Court law.”

HVLPO2, LLC v. Oxygen Frog, LLC

Question(s) Presented

“Whether or not the Panel’s decision that allowing any witness testimony on any aspect of obviousness, even using the standard dictionary definition of the commonly used word ‘obvious,’ by a...

19-1408, 19-1485, 18-2156

Image Processing Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

Question(s) Presented

The government presented the following questions: 1. “Whether the administrative patent judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board are inferior officers of the United States under the Appointments Clause, U.S....

Hospira, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC

Question(s) Presented

“Whether a party seeking to show that a property is inherent in a combination of prior art disclosures must affirmatively prove that the property is necessarily present in that combination,...

CG Technology Development, LLC v. FanDuel, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

1. Whether “the panel impermissibly engaged in appellate factfinding to read the primary obviousness reference . . . in such a way as to affirm unpatentability under a new claim...

Google LLC v. Koninklijke Philips N.V.

Question(s) Presented

“Can a ‘general’ obvious-to-try theory predicated on the idea that a user ‘might’ benefit from a reference’s modification (which is not the theory argued below) be adopted on appeal without...

DiStefano Patent Trust III v. LinkedIn Corp.

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether the Federal Circuit’s standard for evaluating a Complaint’s factual allegations on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, requiring that the district court determine if the factual allegations are...

Molon Motor and Coil Corporation v. Nidec Motor Corporation

Question(s) Presented

“Did the published decision of the 2-1 Panel majority apply an improperly heightened standard for merger of patent license agreements that conflicts with controlling law and the plain terms of...

19-1067, 19-1102

Amgen Inc. v. Hospira, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

“Whether 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) provides a safe harbor against infringement of patents claiming a method of manufacture, when the product manufactured is used to generate information for submission to...

Customedia Technologies, LLC v. DISH Network Corp.

Question(s) Presented

1. “[W]hether a litigant can waive a constitutional defense based on an intervening change of law that implicates important issues of public concern.” 2. “[W]hether, after Arthrex, the Director’s delegation...

Amgen Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether, in order to identify the scope of territory surrendered through a prosecution amendment, the Court must identify and address the predicate ‘rationale underlying the amendment’ before it can...

Persion Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd.

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether it is proper to rely on the description of the invention in a patent-in-suit when combining references under 35 U.S.C. § 103?” 2. “Whether the panel erred by failing...

Personal Audio, LLC v. CBS Corporation

Question(s) Presented

1. “Must the collateral estoppel effect of an IPR be raised and litigated in the appeal of the IPR, rather than in the court in which estoppel is sought?” 2. “Should...

Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Facebook, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

1. "Whether the appointment of Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) violates the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Const., Art 2, §...

In re ThermoLife International LLC

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether the Court may substitute its own factual conclusions for the PTO’s to affirm a revocation of a patentee’s patent rights.” 2. “Whether the Court may affirm agency action based...

Bedgear, LLC v. Fredman Bros. Furniture Co.

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...

Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

The government presented the following questions: 1. “Whether the administrative patent judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board are inferior officers of the United States under the Appointments Clause, U.S....

Bedgear, LLC v. Fredman Bros. Furniture Co.

Question(s) Presented

Whether, “[u]nder this Court’s precedent, including Trading Technologies, Bedgear failed to properly raise an Appointments Clause challenge on appeal and, therefore, waived it.”

1
2
3
4