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Withdrawn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.
18-2273
Case
Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a partner in a collaboration or joint development venture has Article III standing to appeal an adverse decision where the other partner has Article III standing.”
Appeal No.
18-2256
Case
Personal Audio, LLC v. CBS Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2251
Case
Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Facebook, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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, §...
Appeal No.
18-2240, 18-2310
Case
Customedia Technologies, LLC v. DISH Network Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether the Board erred in interpreting the claims to not require a storage section that exclusively stores advertising data.” 2. “Whether the Board erred in finding Hite anticipated Claims 1-3,...
Appeal No.
18-2239
Case
Customedia Technologies, LLC v. DISH Network Corporation
Subject
Patent
Amicus
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Whether “[t]he panel decision conflicts with the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice, and this Court’s decisions in Ancora, SRI, KPN, and Uniloc.”
Appeal No.
18-2198, 18-2303, 18-2305, 18-2306, 18-2317
Case
Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether it is a sufficient basis for denying a permanent injunction that the infringer directly competes with third parties that license completely different patents from the patentholder.” 2. “Whether the...
Appeal No.
18-2189
Case
In re ThermoLife International LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2140
Case
Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Subject
Patent
2 Amici
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.
18-2140
Case
Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Amicus
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the Patent and Trademark Office’s delegation of authority to Commissioner Hirshfeld to review final decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board during a vacancy in the Director’s office...
Appeal No.
18-2128
Case
Eli Lilly and Company v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories
Subject
Patent
Amicus
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2126
Case
Eli Lilly and Company v. Hospira, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Amicus
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2103
Case
The Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Techtronic Industries Co.
Subject
Patent
Amicus
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2097
Case
Valeant Pharmaceuticals Intl. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2082
Case
Bedgear, LLC v. Fredman Bros. Furniture Co.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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.”
Appeal No.
18-2029
Case
Campbell Soup Company v. Gamon Plus, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2024, 18-2025
Case
FOX Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC
Subject
Patent
Amicus
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-2003
Case
Ericsson Inc. v. TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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,...
Appeal No.
18-1976, 18-2023
Case
GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
Subject
Patent
8 Amici
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-1976, 18-2023
Case
GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
Subject
Patent
5 Amici
Status
Denied
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...
Appeal No.
18-1936
Case
Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Apple Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
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...
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19