Search
Search | Sitemap Contact Sign Up

En Banc Petitions

Search By
Status
Subject
352 Petitions
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
17-2533
Case
Mantissa Corporation v. OnDot Systems, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Is a claimed process using generic computer hardware and software patent eligible under Alice Step One if it is ‘directed to an improvement of an existing technology’, Enfish, 822...
Appeal No.
17-2498
Case
Enzo Life Sciences, Inc. v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“[W]hether [the specification] enables creation of a labeled probe that is both hybridizable and detectable upon hybridization,” “not simply whether the specification enables labeling.”
Appeal No.
17-2497
Case
General Electric Company v. United Technologies Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the Panel’s decision following this Court’s decision in AVX Corporation v. Presidio Components, Inc., 923 F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2019), improperly precludes application of the Supreme Court’s competitor standing...
Appeal No.
17-2474
Case
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“If the panel does not grant a rehearing and amend its ‘substantially flexible’ construction to omit the 50 microns requirement, then Elm respectfully submits that the en banc Court should...
Appeal No.
17-2149
Case
HZNP Finance Limited v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the ‘basic and novel properties’ identified in connection with the transitional phrase ‘consisting essentially of’ must independently satisfy the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2 and the...
Appeal No.
16-2231, 17-1838, 17-1832
Case
GS CleanTech Corp. v. Adkins Energy LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “When a district court’s summary judgment of invalidity conclusively establishes the ‘materiality’ prong of inequitable conduct, may this Court refuse to review the summary judgment de novo, and only...
Appeal No.
20-2334, 20-2335, 20-2337, 20-2338, 20-2339, 20-2340
Case
Cornell Research Foundation, Inc. v. Vidal
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Does absence of inherency data in the prior art and only general conclusory expert opinion qualify to meet the ‘high standard’ required for obviousness based inherency of claim limitations that...
Appeal No.
19-1419
Case
Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether methods of separating one naturally occurring material from another using well-known laboratory techniques are patent eligible under step one of the Mayo/Alice analysis, without regard to step two, where...
Appeal No.
20-1475
Case
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v. International Trade Commission
Subject
Patent
Status
Withdrawn
Question(s) Presented
“Where the doctrine of assignor estoppel is applied to preclude a defendant from raising invalidity defenses, whether the Court should address the ‘extent of the estoppel’ in claim construction.” Whether “[t]he...
Appeal No.
20-127
Case
In re Apple Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Withdrawn
Question(s) Presented
1. “[W]hether a district court’s mere application of each § 1404(a) factor precludes mandamus even in the face of multiple clear legal errors in the analysis.” 2. “[W]hether a petitioner is...
Appeal No.
19-2145
Case
EMED Technologies Corp. v. Repro-Med Systems, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Withdrawn
Question(s) Presented
1. “[W]hile the United States Supreme Court instructs the Federal Circuit to have a ‘focus on individual elements and a special vigilance against allowing the concept of equivalence to eliminate...
Appeal No.
19-1542
Case
Spring Ventures, Ltd. v. Google LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Withdrawn
Question(s) Presented
Whether “the panel decision conflicts with this Court’s precedent with respect to the evidentiary basis and the explanation requirement imposed by the [Administrative Procedure Act].”