Other Cases to Watch

Search By
Status
Subject
47 Cases
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Issue(s) Presented
Appeal No.
20-1399
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether the unusual structure for instituting and funding AIA post-grant reviews violates the Due Process Clause in view of Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927), and its progeny, which...
Appeal No.
19-2078, 19-2080, 19-2090, 19-2316
Subject
TakingsAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether the five original conveyance deeds at issue granted easements or fee simple ownership to the railroad under Oregon law.”
Appeal No.
20-1413
Subject
Patent3 Amici
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Did the district court err in excluding evidence of comparable-license negotiations under the parol-evidence rule in a Georgia-Pacific analysis and the resulting royalty opinions?” 2. “Did the district court err...
Appeal No.
20-1074
Subject
Patent4 Amici
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether the district court erred in holding that any reasonable juror was required to find that Sanofi-Regeneron established non-enablement by clear-and- convincing evidence.”
Appeal No.
19-2164
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Did the district court err in concluding that it cannot exercise personal jurisdiction over PerDiemCo even though (a) PerDiemCo expressly and repeatedly accused Trimble, a company based in northern...
Appeal No.
20-1441
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether the unusual structure for instituting and funding AIA post-grant reviews violates the Due Process Clause in view of Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927), and its progeny, which...
Appeal No.
20-1072
Subject
Veterans2 Amici
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
Whether “[t]he Veterans Court’s ‘direct relationship’ requirement is an erroneous legal standard for determining what facts are before the Board because it excludes relevant matters that are known or should...
Appeal No.
20-1305
Subject
Veterans4 Amici
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
“Did the CAVC misinterpret 38 U.S.C. § 7261(a)(2) in holding that a five-year delay in deciding a disabled veteran’s administrative appeal does not amount to an unreasonable delay.” “Did the CAVC...
Appeal No.
19-2147
Subject
Gov. ContractAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether the ASBCA erred in holding that DFARS 252.227-7013 precludes government contractors from marking technical data delivered to the Government in a manner that (a) recognizes the Government’s unlimited rights...
Appeal No.
20-1175
Subject
VeteransAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
“The issues on appeal center on the interplay of the Rule of Two mandate in 38 U.S.C. §§ 8127, 8128 and the printing mandate in 44 U.S.C. § 501 requiring...
Appeal No.
19-2039
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether, in determining that Patent No. 6,477,151 (the ‘151’, or the ‘’151 Patent’) is unenforceable, the district court committed an error of law in failing to apply a ‘but...
Appeal No.
19-1094
Subject
Veterans5 Amici
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Did the CAVC misinterpret Rule 23(a)’s commonality requirement to require that a proposed class of disabled veterans seeking class certification of claims alleging unreasonable system-wide delay always identify a...
Appeal No.
20-1715
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Pending
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether contractual language providing that patents ‘shall be the property of [an employing entity, here, the University of Michigan],’ without requiring any further acts from the parties, operates as...
Appeal No.
18-1976
Subject
Patent3 Amici
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict that Teva willfully induced infringement of GSK’s patented method of treating congestive heart failure where: (a) Teva encouraged the infringing use in promotional...
Appeal No.
19-1133
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the asserted claims are invalid because: (1) They were anticipated by the prior art; or (2)They are not enabled and lack sufficient written description.” 2. “Whether the asserted claims...
Appeal No.
18-2338
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
“I. Network-1’s Appeal A. Independent Basis for Verdict: Does the evidence compel a finding of non-infringement irrespective of the challenged constructions? B. Claim Construction: 1. Did the district court properly construe ‘low level...
Appeal No.
20-144
Subject
Patent2 Amici
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
Whether a “third party’s facility qualif[ies] as a ‘regular and established place of business’ of Google within the Eastern District” based on “Google’s arms-length contract with a third-party service provider...
Appeal No.
20-1723
Subject
Patent2 Amici
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the district court legally erred in its framework for evaluating objective indicia of non-obviousness, by (a) concluding that the claims were obvious before even analyzing the compelling objective...
Appeal No.
2019-1290 (L), 2019-1302
Subject
Tucker Act2 Amici
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the insurers’ statutory claims fail because Congress did not intend for insurers to receive damages as compensation for cost-sharing payments that Congress declined to fund.” 2. “Whether the insurers’...
Appeal No.
19-1081
Subject
Little Tucker Act5 Amici
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
“Congress has conferred limited authority on the judiciary to charge fees for access to electronic court records. These fees may be imposed ‘as a charge for services rendered’ to ‘reimburse...