Search
Search | Sitemap Contact Sign Up

En Banc Petitions

Search By
Status
Subject
465 Petitions
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
24-1401
Case
Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd.
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Denied
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.
24-1360, 24-1361
Case
Clantech, Inc. v. CoStar Realty Information, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. Whether “a claim element (or term) in a single patent claim has the same meaning throughout the claim.” 2. Whether “the Board [complied] with the Administrative Procedure Act in inter...
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.
24-1201
Case
EscapeX IP, LLC v. Google, LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether affirmance of [28 U.S.C.] § 1927 sanctions based on ‘recklessness’ and ‘objective’ indicia, without an explicit finding of subjective bad faith, conflicts with Ninth Circuit precedent requiring a...
Appeal No.
24-1194, 24-1221, 24-1222, 24-1223
Case
CAO Lighting, Inc. v. Wolfspeed, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “May the Board adopt and apply a new claim construction for the first time in its Final Written Decisions and may the Court use Circuit Rule 36 to summarily...
Appeal No.
24-1181
Case
Shilpa Pharma, Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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.
24-1177
Case
PowerBlock Holdings, Inc. v. iFit, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Can a system that performs an abstract idea avoid ineligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by reciting conventional components that perform only their basic functions at a high degree of...
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.
24-1129
Case
Guardant Health, Inc. v. University of Washington
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the presence of two claim elements together in a prior-art embodiment, standing alone, dispositively proves that the combination of those elements would be obvious—notwithstanding the level of detail in...
Appeal No.
24-1078
Case
Duke University v. Sandoz Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a panel of this Court can decide the adequacy of written description—a question of fact—without deferring to a jury’s verdict.”
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...
Appeal No.
24-1040
Case
Mark H. Sandstrom v. Microsoft Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“[W]hether the patent owner should carry the burden of proving non-enablement in an IPR.”
Appeal No.
24-1023, 24-1127
Case
Indect USA Corp. v. Park Assist, LLC
Subject
Lanham Act
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether evidence of litigation is admissible to support an unfair competition claim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act.”
Appeal No.
23-2437
Case
Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. Whether “[b]y requiring any machine learning invention to claim both (1) new applications of machine learning and (2) machine learning models unknown in the prior art, the panel confuses...
Appeal No.
23-2434
Case
Bayer Pharma Aktiengesellschaft v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“When may a court discount a claim limitation in the body of a claim for purposes of assessing patentability?”
Appeal No.
23-2346
Case
Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co.
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether an abandoned patent publication that became publicly accessible only after the challenged patent’s critical date is a ‘prior art . . . printed publication[]’ that can be a basis...
Appeal No.
23-2329
Case
Khan v. Merit Medical Systems, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
23-2317, 23-2319
Case
In re Entresto
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the availability of a pediatric exclusivity period gives a court Article III jurisdiction to adjudicate patent infringement even after the patent has expired.”
Appeal No.
23-2308
Case
Ball Metal Beverage Container Corp. v. Crown Packaging Technology, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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...