FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update two new petitions were filed, one raising a question related to patent law’s definiteness requirement and one in a pro se case. Two amicus briefs were filed in a case raising questions concerning the clear and unmistakeable error standard with regarding to a claim for veterans’ benefits. Two waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in government contracts and pro se cases. A reply was filed in support of a petition in a veterans case. And, finally, a supplemental brief was filed in a government contracts case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a government contract case appealed from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. The court also issued a nonprecedential order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus addressing the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware’s decision to grant a motion to dismiss for lack of constitutional standing. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received two new petitions raising questions related to assignments of patents and the non-obviousness requirement. The court also invited responses to petitions in two cases concerning the standard of review of Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions and assignments of patents. Lastly, the court denied a petition for rehearing en banc in a case raising questions related to Appointments Clause challenges with respect to Administrative Patent Judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a case appealed from the United States Court of Federal Claims. The opinion reviews a denial of a motion for attorney fees. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

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

• an article discussing the outcome of a patent case originating at the International Trade Commission;
• a post discussing how the Federal Circuit upheld a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision that claims did not meet the requirement of eligibility; and
• an article discussing how the Federal Circuit found that UGG AUSTRALIA was a valid trademark and not generic; and
• another article discussing how two recent Federal Circuit decisions may be “welcome news for federal employees at all agencies.”

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board and the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The first opinion reviews a decision by the Merit Systems Protection Board sustaining a charge of conduct unbecoming of a federal employee. The second opinion addresses jurisdiction. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is this month’s update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases we highlight three dispositions in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, a patent case appealed from a federal district court, and a tax case appealed from the Court of International Trade. We also highlight a new patent case raising a question related to personal jurisdiction and service of process, along with a copyright case that attracted five new amicus briefs. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the United States International Trade Commission. The opinion addresses arguments the Commission erred with regard to its analysis of claim construction and infringement. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

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

• a blog post discussing the exclusion of expert testimony related to patent damages;
• an article indicating that recent Federal Circuit opinions have created “a blueprint for companies that want to get cases moved out of the nation’s fledgling patent-dispute hotbed”; and
• a report on the outcome of one of Apple’s challenges to patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

This morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions, one in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and three in pro se cases, two appealed from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board and one appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions.