FedCircuitBlog

Today, the Federal Circuit announced that it has released an updated calendar of its sessions in 2025-2026. Here is the full text of the announcement.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article addressing how a “U.S. judge dismissed the state of California’s challenge to President Donald Trump’s tariffs, allowing the state to file an appeal over the court’s ruling that the dispute should have been filed in a specialized U.S. trade court in New York”;
• another report covering how a “federal judge in Washington, D.C., extended a pause on his order invalidating the bulk of President Trump’s tariffs” until the Federal Circuit can “resolve the case”; and
• a piece examining how the “U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) held a ‘USPTO Hour’ Wednesday in which it announced the results of a study it apparently conducted over the last five years.”

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released three precedential opinions, three nonprecedential opinions, two Rule 36 judgments, and one nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmances and dismissals.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted petitions, there has been no new activity since our last post. With respect to pending petitions, there were three waivers of right to respond to petitions, one in a pro se case, one in a patent case, and another in a government contracts case. There were also two new replies filed in support of petitions in patent cases. Finally, there were two denials of petitions filed in patent cases. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and two Rule 36 summary affirmances. Of the precedential opinions, one of the cases was a patent case appealed from a district court and the other was a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. Both of the nonprecedential opinions come in cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmances.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article describing how the Federal Circuit “temporarily reinstated the most sweeping of President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Thursday, a day after a U.S. trade court ruled that Trump had exceeded his authority in imposing the duties and ordered an immediate block on them;”
• another article similarly addressing how the Federal Circuit “temporarily agreed to preserve many of President Trump’s sweeping tariffs on China and other U.S. trading partners”;
• a report outlining how “[t]hree appeals in federal patent-infringement lawsuits center on the legality of an East Texas judge’s unconventional choice to have juries answer a single yes-or-no question on whether defendants copied multiple patents rather than deciding separately whether each individual patent was infringed”; and
• a piece examining the “intellectual property-related provisions” in “the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill Act,’” which passed the House of Representatives on May 22.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. Two of the orders were released in cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. One was released in a case appealed from a district court. Here are links to the dismissals.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, the en banc court issued an order granting an immediate administrative stay of judgments and permanent injunctions. As for the two pending en banc cases, the court will hear oral argument next week in one, a government contract case, and the court received an amicus brief in the other, which raises questions related to statutory interpretation and agency deference. As for pending petitions, since our last update the court received five new petitions, three in patent cases, one in a case raising questions related to statutory interpretation, and one in a pro se case. In addition, a response has been filed to a petition in a patent case raising a question related to collateral estoppel. The court also denied two petitions for en banc rehearing in a patent case and a pro se case. Here are the details.

In late May, the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in Ecofactor, Inc. v. Google LLC. In this case, Google appealed a judgment decided of the Western District of Texas, which denied its motion for a new trial on damages. In an opinion authored by Chief Judge Moore and joined by Judges Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and remanded the case for a new trial on damages. The Federal Circuit additionally reinstated the panel opinion as to issues other than damages. This is our opinion summary.

Late Friday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Today, the Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential orders, one dismissing an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims and the other dismissing an appeal from the District of Delaware. Here are links to the dismissals.