FedCircuitBlog

Late last month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in FS.COM Inc. v. International Trade Commission, a patent case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In the opinion, the Federal Circuit reviewed a determination by the International Trade Commission that FS violated 19 U.S.C. § 1337. In an opinion authored by Chief Judge Moore and joined by Judges Prost and Hughes, the Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s decision. This is our opinion summary.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions, one summary affirmance, and four orders dismissing appeals. The nonprecedential opinions affirm a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims dismissing a pro se case for lack of jurisdiction, a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirming a dismissal by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals for lack of jurisdiction, and a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board dismissing an appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmance and dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case. In it, the court explains why it reverses a district court’s judgment that someone should be added as a joint inventor. The court also released a summary affirmance in another case. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the summary affirmance.

Last month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in SAS Institute, Inc. v. World Programming Limited, a copyright case we have been following because it attracted several amicus briefs. In this case, SAS Institute appealed a decision by the Eastern District of Texas to dismiss claims of copyright infringement by World Programming. SAS contended the district court incorrectly analyzed copyrightability and incorrectly excluded witness testimony. In an opinion authored by Judge Reyna and joined by Judge Wallach, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding. Notably, Judge Newman dissented. This is our opinion summary

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a trade case and four nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the dismissals.

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. In total, the court will convene ten panels to consider 55 cases this week. Of these 55 cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 39. The Federal Circuit is providing access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, one case attracted an amicus brief. Here’s what you need to know about this case.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential order announcing that a majority of the judges in regular active service voted for sua sponte en banc consideration of a case involving an alleged violation of the Equal Pay Act. The court also released a precedential opinion in the same case, vacating a dismissal and remanding the case for further proceedings. In Part II.B of the opinion, the en banc court overruled one of the court’s prior opinions, which the court explains “added an extra element to an EPA claimant’s prima facie case—namely, a showing that the pay differential ‘is either historically or presently based on sex.’” Here is the text of the order and the introduction to the opinion.

This morning the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions. One comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, one in a patent case appealed from the International Trade Commission, and one in an employment case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Dixon v. United States, a case that concerns the application of the informal claim doctrine of a tax refund request. Dixon appeals a ruling of the Court of Federal Claims, arguing that the court erred in dismissing his claim based on subject matter jurisdiction or for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Judges Taranto, Clevenger, and Hughes heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, the first addressing jurisdiction in a veteran’s case and the second addressing entitlement to attorneys’ fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion addressing entitlement to annuities by eligible survivors of U.S. military personnel. Finally, the court also dismissed a case. Here are the introductions to the opinion and a link to the dismissal.