FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to the Supreme Court’s October 2021 term, the Court still has not granted any petitions in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last report, however, ten new petitions have been filed in patent, government contract, veterans, and pro se cases; briefs in opposition have been filed in three patent and veterans cases; replies in support of petitions have been filed in three patent cases; the Court requested a response to a petition in a patent case; and the Court denied petitions in three patent, trademark, and pro se cases. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions affirming dismissals for lack of jurisdiction in pro se cases, along with a Rule 36 summary affirmance. Here are the introductions to the opinion and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Northern District of West Virginia. In the opinion, based on a changed claim construction the court vacated a judgment of noninfringement, but the court also affirmed a determination of nonobviousness. Judge Taranto dissented in part based on disagreement with the Federal Circuit’s claim construction. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and another nonprecedential opinion in a pro se case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, a nonprecedential opinion, and two nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinions come in a government contract case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims and a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The nonprecedential opinion comes in a pro se case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The nonprecedential orders dismiss petitions for writs of mandamus, one seeking to order transfer in a patent case and the other in an apparent pro se case pending at the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• two articles discussing Federal Circuit-nominee and currently District of Delaware Judge Leonard Stark’s recent confirmation hearing;
• another article about a potential patent infringement lawsuit related to a COVID-19 vaccine; and
• an article discussing a recent petition filed at the Supreme Court related to patent eligibility law.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order in a patent case. In the order, the court denied a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to direct the Western District of Texas to transfer the case. The Federal Circuit highlighted that the petitioner did not ask the district court to reconsider its decision. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit, with hearings starting today. As it has for some time now, the Federal Circuit is providing access to live audio of each panel scheduled for argument via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. In total, including a case set to be argued next week, the court will convene 15 panels to consider about 61 cases. Of these 61 cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 48. Of these argued cases, three attracted amicus briefs: two veterans cases and a benefits case. Here’s what you need to know about these three cases.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion reversing and remanding a patent case back to the Court of Federal Claims. Judge Hughes filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. The court also released an order dismissing a petition for a writ of mandamus. Here are the introductions to the opinions and order.

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website.

We are previewing three cases scheduled to be argued next week at the Federal Circuit that attracted amicus briefs. Today we highlight Military-Veterans Advocacy, Inc. v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs. In this case, Military-Veterans Advocacy, Inc. appeals a denial of rulemaking by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that would have sought to extend the presumption of herbicide exposure to veterans who served on Guam from January 9, 1962, through December 31, 1980; Johnston Island from January 1, 1972 until September 30, 1977; and American Samoa. Two amicus briefs support MVA on appeal. This is our argument preview.