FedCircuitBlog

I’m excited to announce that this week FedCircuitBlog will host its second online symposium. The symposium will be a Year in Review, reviewing the work of the Federal Circuit in 2020 in various areas of the court’s jurisdiction: appeals involving international trade, patents, money damages claims against the federal government, federal employment law, and veterans’ benefits. We will welcome guest blog posts from leading professors and practitioners in these subject matter areas. Here, however, I first provide a brief overview of the court’s activity this past year–a year markedly different as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, but a year in which the court continued its work hearing appeals and deciding cases in the areas of its jurisdiction.

This week we are previewing two cases being argued next week at the Federal Circuit that attracted amicus briefs. Today we highlight a veterans case, Lynch v. McDonough. In this case, Lynch asks the Federal Circuit to overrule its decision in Ortiz v. Principi, a case that sets forth the burden of proof by which veterans must prove their claims. This is our argument preview.

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

• Patent Appeal Lessons From Fed. Circ. Remote En Banc Args – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has sat remotely en banc for only two cases in the past year, both of which have been veterans cases, but their oral arguments can provide insight to all practitioners.
• Novartis Patent on MS Drug Gilenya Evades Supreme Court Scrutiny – The Supreme Court will not explore the debate over whether being in regular competition is enough to challenge a PTAB ruling on a rival’s patent without having been sued for infringement.  
• Fourth Circuit Finds ‘Pretzel Crisps’ Plaintiffs are Not Bound to Federal Circuit Across Appeals from Distinct TTAB Decisions – The Fourth Circuit joins the Seventh and Ninth Circuits in considering the reach of the Lanham Act’s permission to seek review of a TTAB decision at either the CAFC or in federal district court.

Here’s the latest.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit.

• The Supreme Court received four new petitions for writ of certiorari.
• Three new response briefs were filed with the Court. Two in Iancu v. Fall Line Patents, LLC and one in Ericsson Inc. v. TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited.
• Two new amicus briefs were filed with the Court in Sellers v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the first by the National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium and the second by the Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc.
• One letter to Justice Barrett was filed with the Court by counsel for Sasso in Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. v. Sasso, notifying Justice Barrett of a potential conflict of interest.
• Two waivers of right to respond were filed with the Court.
• Lastly, the Court denied the petitions in two cases: (1) Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and (2) Wynkoop v. Department of Defense.

Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case addressing patent eligibility and a precedential opinion in a veterans case involving a denial of duplicative educational benefits. Additionally, the court issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit and the Court of Federal Claims issued a joint order extending limitations on access to the Federal Courts Building through April 30, 2021. The Federal Circuit also issued a notice with additional information related to the order. Here is the text from the court’s notice.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a vaccine case affirming the denial for a petition of compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The court also issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity in patent cases at the Federal Circuit. The court received a new petition raising questions related to intervening rights, willfulness, and unclean hands, and the court invited a response to a petition raising questions related to claim construction and the doctrine of equivalents. Here are the details.  

• How to Choose the Next Federal Circuit Judge: Stick with Experience – Retired Judge Paul Michel of the Federal Circuit shares his thoughts on a future nominee to the Federal Circuit.
• In “Landmark” Ruling, Court Raises Threshold for Firing Feds – The Federal Circuit ruled that agencies must show cause when putting employees on a performance improvement plan in Santos v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
• Inventors, Tech Are Taking The Brunt Of Alice Axes – Researchers from Stanford Law School published a study on patent eligibility following the Federal Circuit’s decision in Alice.

Here’s the latest.