Search
Search | Sitemap Contact Sign Up

En Banc Petitions

Search By
Status
Subject
447 Petitions
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
26-104
Case
In re Comcast Cable Communications, LLC
Subject
Patent2 Amici
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a defendant’s alleged performance of a single step of a claimed multi-step method in a judicial district is sufficient to establish that ‘the defendant has committed acts of infringement’...
Appeal No.
24-1876, 24-1885
Case
Orange Electronic Co. v. Autel Intelligent Technology Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. Whether “the panel decision misapplied the standard for obviousness in dismissing substantial evidence as to the prior art teachings and secondary considerations.” 2. Whether “the panel ignored substantial evidence of...
Appeal No.
24-1467
Case
Gamevice, Inc. v. Nintendo Co.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether, contrary to longstanding rules of judicial estoppel and law of the case, a party who obtains summary judgment that its product practices a patent limitation for purposes of...
Appeal No.
24-1078
Case
Duke University v. Sandoz Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
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.
24-1023, 24-1127
Case
Indect USA Corp. v. Park Assist, LLC
Subject
Lanham Act
Status
Pending
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.
23-1101
Case
EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Granted
Question(s) Presented
Did the court err in “failing to rigorously scrutinize a patentee’s reliance on supposedly comparable licenses” resulting in an “artificially inflated damages award that is divorced from market realities and...
Appeal No.
21-2348
Case
LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC
Subject
Patent3 Amici
Status
Granted
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the rigid approach to evaluating the obviousness of designs under In re Rosen, 673 F.2d 388, 391 (CCPA 1982) and Durling v. Spectrum Furniture Co., Inc., 101 F.3d 100...
Appeal No.
18-2170
Case
Bedgear, LLC v. Fredman Bros. Furniture Co.
Subject
Patent
Status
Moot
Question(s) Presented
Bedgear, LLC asserts that “[e]n banc review is necessary to secure and maintain uniformity in the Court’s decisions in all pending cases that raise the same important constitutional question whether...
Appeal No.
26-102
Case
In re Catanzaro
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether rehearing en banc is warranted where, after the panel’s denial of mandamus, the district court issued an order (Doc. 139) before the mandate had issued, relying on a...
Appeal No.
25-138
Case
In re VirtaMove Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. Whether, “[f]or the ‘clearly materialize’ burden of proof, the Google Decision is inconsistent with the Fifth Circuit and failed to properly impose the burden on Google, leaving open the...
Appeal No.
25-130
Case
In re VirtaMove Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. Whether, “[f]or the ‘clearly materialize’ burden of proof, the Google Decision is inconsistent with the Fifth Circuit and failed to properly impose the burden on Google, leaving open the...
Appeal No.
25-1269
Case
Sandstrom v. International Trade Commission
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
25-1210, 25-1211
Case
Merck Serono S.A. v. Hopewell Pharma Ventures, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether a disclosure of an invention may be treated as a disclosure ‘by others’ or ‘by another’ under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a), (e) and thus as prior art to a...
Appeal No.
24-2335
Case
FMC Corp. v. Sharda USA, LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Do ordinary claim-construction principles control whether a preamble is limiting, or are preambles subject to special, categorical rules applicable to no other part of the claim?”
Appeal No.
24-2256
Case
Golden v. United States
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
24-2148
Case
Li v. Apple Inc.
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether a prior art reference needs to include a written description to disclose a negative limitation, or whether silence constitutes such a disclosure.” 2. “Whether the panel may interpret a...
Appeal No.
24-2030, 24-2031, 24-2032, 24-2033, 24-2035, 24-2036, 24-2037, 24-2038
Case
Wakefield v. Blackboard, Inc.
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether the inclusion of Judge Pauline Newman, or any judge who has a witnessed and documented state of deteriorating mental capacity is allowable in the proper application of 28 U.S.C....
Appeal No.
24-2024
Case
Golden v. Google, LLC
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
24-1936
Case
Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC
Subject
Patent3 Amici
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“This case presents a question that is fundamental to the Hatch-Waxman framework: what patents must be listed in the Orange Book?”
Appeal No.
24-1801
Case
Polar Electro Oy v. Suunto Oy
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether the decision to affirm § 101 ineligibility conflicts with this Court’s and the Supreme Court’s precedents holding that claims directed to improved processes, here specific technological improvements to...