FedCircuitBlog

Late on Friday the Federal Circuit issued two precedential orders in patent cases and one nonprecedential order in a patent case. These orders represent the immediate fall out from the Federal Circuit’s opinion late on Thursday in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. that the Secretary of Commerce’s appointment of Administrative Patent Judges to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board violates the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. (You can find this blog’s report on that decision here.) On Friday, the Federal Circuit ruled in two cases that the appellants forfeited this same challenge by not raising it in their opening briefs, but instead only in a post-briefing motion or notice of supplemental authority. In the third case, the court canceled this week’s oral argument, vacated the PTAB’s decision, and remanded the case because the appellant did raise the Appointments Clause challenge in its opening brief. Here is the text of the orders.

Today the Federal Circuit issued one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. 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 comment on upcoming oral arguments over whether PTAB judges are inferior or superior officers, news about South Carolina’s opening brief in their fight with the U.S. government over fines for storage of plutonium in the state, and a note on the U.S. Army urging the Federal Circuit to uphold a contracting board’s decision sparing the Army from paying $48 million for military escort delays.

While the Federal Circuit did not issue any opinions this morning, this afternoon (after the time the court typically issues opinions) it issued an important precedential opinion in a patent case, Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. In this case Arthrex argued that the the Secretary of Commerce’s appointment of Administrative Patent Judges to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board violates the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Federal Circuit agreed. The court, however, also noted the limited nature of its holding and the limited remedy its holding required.

The Federal Circuit did not issue any opinions this morning.

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

Today the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions in patent cases and one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include three new petitions, two responses to petitions, and two requests from the Federal Circuit for responses to petitions.

Today the Federal Circuit issued one precedential opinion in a government contract case, one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case, and one nonprecedential opinion in a government contract case. 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 a discussion of an oral argument addressing the constitutionality of the appointment of the judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, an article on the Federal Circuit’s rejection of a challenge by Google to a patent related to encoding audio signals, and a note on a recent petition for en banc rehearing.