Home
Opinions
En Banc
Supreme Court
Other Cases
Administration
All Posts
Opinion Posts
News
SCOTUS Activity
En Banc Activity
Panel Activity
Search
All
Posts
Opinions
En Banc Cases
En Banc Petitions
Supreme Court Cases
Supreme Court Petitions
Other Cases
Search
|
Sitemap
Contact
Sign Up
Home
Opinions
En Banc
Cases
Petitions
Supreme Court
Cases
Petitions
Other Cases
Administration
En Banc Petitions
Search By
Status
Any
Pending
Moot
Granted
Denied
Withdrawn
Subject
Any
Asbestos
Antitrust
Attorney Client Privilege
Attorney Fees
Bankruptcy
Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act
Clean Water Act
Contract
Compensation Clause
Complaint of Judicial Misconduct
Copyright
Death Benefit
Disqualification
EAJA
Eminent Domain
Employment
Equal Pay Act
Errata
Fair Labor Standards Act
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Financial
Foreign Relations Authorization Act
Gov. Contract
Indian Tucker Act
IRS
Jurisdiction
Lanham Act
Little Tucker Act
Military
MSPB
Nuclear Waste
Order
Patent
Patent and Plant Variety Protection Remedy Clarification Act
Plant Variety Protection Act
Postal
Procedure
Pro Se
Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Act
Randolph-Sheppard Act
Rule 36
Rule 50
Sanctions
Standing
Takings
Tax
Tucker Act
Trade
Trademark
Trade Secret
Vaccine
Vaccine Act
Veterans
364 Petitions
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
19-1649
Case
HVLPO2, LLC v. Oxygen Frog, LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
19-1643, 19-1644, 19-1645
Case
BioDelivery Sciences Int'l v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether the Court has authority to review the PTAB’s final decision in a remanded IPR for compliance with a remand order—regardless of the PTAB’s characterization of its decision?” 2. “Whether...
Appeal No.
19-1602
Case
EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the bare idea of automating a known, manual process using a generic machine is a patent-eligible invention.”
Appeal No.
19-1582, 19-1584, 19-1635
Case
Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corp. v. Nevro Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. Whether Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019) is a change in intervening law that, when raised, must be applied to cases pending...
Appeal No.
19-1570
Case
Deep Green Wireless LLC v. Ooma, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“[T]he panel majority affirmed the Board’s decision, on the basis that the Board’s construction was ‘not inconsistent with the specification’s disclosure.’ But this Court has held that simply checking whether...
Appeal No.
19-1558
Case
Sowinski v. California Air Resources Board
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether, in direct conflict with the Supreme Court’s unmistakable guidance, this Court erred in crafting a patent-specific preclusion doctrine that bars new issues and new claims that would survive the...
Appeal No.
19-1522
Case
Intellisoft, Ltd. v. Acer America Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether a state trade secret claim that requires resolution of who invented a patent claim, and whether patent claims read on an industry standard, ‘necessarily raises’ a federal issue...
Appeal No.
19-1506
Case
Free Stream Media Corp. v. Alphonso Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Whether “the panel decision is contrary to at least the following . . . precedents of this Court: Aatrix Software, Inc. v. Gree Shades Software, Inc., 882 F.3d 1121 (Fed....
Appeal No.
19-1471
Case
Piccone v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Consideration by the full court is . . . necessary to secure and maintain uniformity of the Court’s decisions as follows:” “The Panel Decision finding that the USPTO OED Director may...
Appeal No.
19-1467, 19-1468
Case
Alacritech, Inc. v. Intel Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Questions Presented by Alacritech: “[W]hether the Arthrex panel erred in severing the removal provisions necessary to sustain PTAB judges’ independent and impartiality, instead of striking down the entire statute.” Questions Presented by...
Appeal No.
19-1464
Case
Alacritech, Inc. v. Intel Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Questions Presented by Alacritech: “[W]hether the Arthrex panel erred in severing the removal provisions necessary to sustain PTAB judges’ independent and impartiality, instead of striking down the entire statute.” Questions Presented by...
Appeal No.
19-1444, 19-1445, 19-1466
Case
Alacritech, Inc. v. Intel Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Questions Presented by Alacritech: “[W]hether the Arthrex panel erred in severing the removal provisions necessary to sustain PTAB judges’ independent and impartiality, instead of striking down the entire statute.” Questions Presented by...
Appeal No.
19-1443, 19-1447, 19-1449, 19-1450
Case
Intel Corporation v. Alacritech, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Questions Presented by Alacritech: 1. “Whether Intel forfeited an Arthrex challenge to the portion of the PTAB’s decision concerning claims 31-33 because Intel voluntarily chose to file a petition before the...
Appeal No.
19-1435, 19-1717
Case
Spigen Korea Co. v. Ultraproof, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. Whether “[t]he Court failed to appreciate the inventor’s implicit admission that the ’218 patent is a suitable primary reference in his conception drawing.” 2. Whether “[t]he Court misapprehended the effect...
Appeal No.
19-1424
Case
Gensetix, Inc. v. Baylor College of Medicine
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Can a party who is not a patentee ‘have remedy by civil action for infringement’?”
Appeal No.
19-1408, 19-1485, 18-2156
Case
Image Processing Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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....
Appeal No.
19-1368
Case
Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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;” and 2. “[W]hether, consistent with KSR, patent claims...
Appeal No.
19-1365
Case
Mass Engineered Design, Inc. v. Planar Systems, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a party seeking to establish 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) statutory equivalents is required to provide particularized testimony and linking argument of equivalents as is required to establish infringement under...
Appeal No.
19-1345
Case
Solutran, Inc. v. Elavon, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Must section 101 analysis start with identifying the inventors’ claimed advance over the prior art?” 2. “Are patent claims that improve physical processes by definition non-abstract?” 3. “Are non-technical business-method inventions...
Appeal No.
19-1342
Case
Kingston Technology Company v. SPEX Technologies, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether this Court must interpret and apply the words ‘under this section’ as used in the No-Appeal bar, 35 U.S.C. § 314(d), without regard to whether appeal is taken...
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19