FedCircuitBlog

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This morning the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions.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 The court also released a nonprecedential opinion addressing entitlement to annuities by eligible survivors of U.S. military personnel.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.

The Federal Circuit heard oral argument earlier this month in Jenkins v. United States, a takings case that attracted two amicus briefs. In this case, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a determination by a district court that Jenkins is not entitled to compensation for the loss of his vehicles seized during a criminal investigation. Judges Lourie, Dyk, and Stark heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions in trade and government contracts cases along with three nonprecedential opinions in patent and trade cases. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion transferring an appeal to the Second Circuit along with a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and order and a link to the dismissal.

The Federal Circuit heard oral argument earlier this month in Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, a trade case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a determination by the by the Court of International Trade that the “President’s authority to modify a safeguard measure under 19 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(B) is limited solely to ‘trade-liberalizing’ modifications, and that Proclamation 10101 thus went beyond the President’s statutory authority.” Judges Lourie, Taranto, and Stark heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

Today the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and three nonprecedential orders. The first opinion affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the second affirms a judgment of the Western District of Texas in a patent case. Two of the orders transfer appeals, and one dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders and a link to the dismissal.

The Federal Circuit heard oral argument earlier this month in Gorge Design Group LLC v. Xuansheng, a patent case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a determination by a district court that Gorge’s claims against NeoMagic were not frivolous and that NeoMagic was not entitled to its attorneys’ fees. Judges Taranto, Clevenger, and Hughes heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.