FedCircuitBlog

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. The court will convene just 3 panels to consider 16 cases. Of these cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 11 cases. The Federal Circuit is providing access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, just one case scheduled for oral argument attracted an amicus brief. Here’s what you need to know about that case.

This morning the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion. The opinion affirms in part, vacates in part, and remands a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

One case that attracted an amicus brief will be argued in August at the Federal Circuit. That case is Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., in which the Federal Circuit will review a district court’s order denying an antisuit injunction. This is our argument preview.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and three nonprecedential opinions. The first precedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the second precedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The first nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board, the second affirms a judgment of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and the third vacates and remands a grant of a preliminary injunction by the Southern District of Ohio in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

The Federal Circuit announced that the Clerk’s Office and Circuit Library will be closed today from 1:00 to 3:45 pm. Here is the full text of today’s announcement.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. This week’s highlights include new petitions filed in a patent case raising questions related to Rule 36 and a pro se case raising questions related to Whistleblower Protection Act, a new brief in opposition filed in another patent case raising questions related to patent eligibility, and a new waiver of the right to respond in a third patent case raising questions related to prior art that may be asserted in inter partes review proceedings. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and four nonprecedential orders. The first precedential opinion reverses and remands a grant of summary judgment by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, while the second precedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The first nonprecedential opinion dismisses half of a consolidated appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board while affirming the other half, while the second nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. All of the orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders.

Earlier this month the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., a patent case that attracted an amicus brief.  In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss inducement claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The Federal Circuit reversed the judgment of the District of Delaware in an opinion authored by Judge Lourie that was joined by Chief Judge Moore and Western District of Texas Judge Alan Albright, who sat by designation. This is our opinion summary.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity in patent cases at the Federal Circuit. A new petition was filed in a patent case raising questions concerning patent eligibility. Here are the details.

Earlier this month the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Backertop Licensing LLC v. Canary Connect, Inc., a patent case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case the Federal Circuit reviewed a determination by the District of Delaware that an out-of-state non-party was in contempt of court for disregarding an order requiring her to testify at a hearing. The Federal Circuit, in an opinion authored by Judge Hughes that was joined by Judges Prost and Stoll, affirmed the contempt order of the district court. This is our opinion summary.