Petitions - Fed Circuit Blog

| Sitemap Contact Sign Up

Search By

Status

Subject

375 Petitions

Appeal No.

Case

Subject

Status

Question(s) Presented

Eli Lilly and Company v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories

Question(s) Presented

“When an alleged equivalent falls within the territory surrendered by a patentee’s narrowing amendment, does the ‘tangential’ exception to prosecution history estoppel apply because the patentee surrendered more than necessary...

Eli Lilly and Company v. Hospira, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

“When an alleged equivalent falls within the territory surrendered by a patentee’s narrowing amendment, does the ‘tangential’ exception to prosecution history estoppel apply because the patentee surrendered more than necessary...

The Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Techtronic Industries Co.

Question(s) Presented

1. “Where the district court did not reach Alice step two, or address how the jury’s verdict of novelty and non-obviousness affects the factual aspects of step two, may this...

Valeant Pharmaceuticals Intl. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Question(s) Presented

“Whether this Court’s historically narrow principle of prima facie obviousness in overlapping range cases should be extended to apply in cases where the prior art differs from the claimed invention...

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.”

Campbell Soup Company v. Gamon Plus, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

1. “In a design-patent obviousness analysis, is it proper to modify a reference using a utility-patent functional theory to make the reference qualify as a primary reference?” 2. “Is it proper...

18-2024, 18-2025

FOX Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether the Panel erred by creating a new legal standard that a nexus between a patent claim and objective evidence of nonobviousness can only be presumed where the patentee...

Ericsson Inc. v. TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd.

Question(s) Presented

“Whether, in determining whether a claim is directed to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101, the claim must be ‘considered in light of the specification,’ as held in Enfish,...

18-1976, 18-2023

GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

“The questions concern whether induced infringement can be used to nullify a provision of the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. Congress specified in Hatch-Waxman that when a drug is no longer patented and...

18-1976, 18-2023

GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

Whether the “inducement doctrine can be used to nullify a provision of the Hatch-Waxman Amendments.” Whether when “a product has substantial noninfringing uses and the defendant has deleted instructions to practice...

Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Apple Inc.

Question(s) Presented

“Whether a claim construction that is otherwise proper based on the claim language and specification can be narrowed based on prosecution history that does not clearly and unmistakably dictate a...

Elbit Systems Land and C4I Ltd v. Hughes Network Systems, LLC

Question(s) Presented

“Whether an expert who relies on an allegedly comparable agreement to calculate reasonable-royalty damages must: 1. perform an apportionment analysis that applies to the facts of the case, rather than merely...

Hafco Foundry and Machine Co. v. GMS Mine Repair and Maintenance, Inc.

Question(s) Presented

“Whether granting trial courts broad discretion to do design patent claim construction in Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. Swisa, Inc., 543 F.3d 665 (Fed. Cir. 2008), is consistent with the Patent...

Polaris Innovations Limited v. Kingston Technology Co.

Question(s) Presented

Questions Presented by the Government: 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. Const....

Question(s) Presented

“In failing to consider the predictability of [the underlying technology], and by allowing the Board to characterize routine steps as a ‘mere wish or plan’ without performing the required Ariad...

Polaris Innovations Limited v. Kingston Technology Co.

Question(s) Presented

Polaris Innovations Limited presents the following questions: 1. “Whether severance of the tenure protections for Administrative Patent Judges (‘APJs’) was not available to the Arthrex panel to remedy the violation of...

American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether courts can find patent claims ineligible without identifying any precise ineligible concept the claims are allegedly directed to.” 2. “Whether, on summary judgment, the Federal Circuit can disregard facts...

Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Iancu

Question(s) Presented

“Where a patent challenger does not dispute that the patent is entitled to a particular priority date, does the patentee nonetheless bear the burden to affirmatively prove entitlement to that...

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Semiconductor Components

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) of the America Invents Act (‘AIA’) requires the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (‘Board’) to assess the timeliness of inter partes review (‘IPR’) petitions...

Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. Boston Scientific Corporation

Question(s) Presented

1. “Whether the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), dictates venue in state party patent infringement cases.” 2. “Whether state sovereignty includes the right to not litigate in a nonresident...

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19