1. “Whether the district court erred by not granting a judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) of no anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102) when the alleged public use...
Appeal:
1. “Whether the Director’s sanctions rulings, including refusal to terminate the IPR, were arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law, or otherwise inconsistent with reasoned decisionmaking.”
2. “Whether Intel was improperly joined because...
1. “Whether the Board’s construction of claim 16 was erroneous, where it contradicts the construction the Board adopted in finding the same claim patentable during prior reexaminations.”
2. “Whether the Board’s...
1. “Did the Commission err in holding that Vicor had given Foxconn a royalty-free license to Vicor’s patents, where Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 106, § 2-207 requires that all...
1. “Whether the USPTO violated the APA and AIA by imposing limitations on IPR institution without notice-and-comment rulemaking, including:”
a. “Applying the new ‘settled expectations’ rule without authority or reasoned decision...
“Cellulose is a leading developer and manufacturer of various insulation products, including the InfinityCore® brand of thermoplastic packaging products. Cellulose sued Defendant-Appellee SC Marketing Group, Inc. (a/k/a Thermal Shipping Solutions)...
1. “Whether mandamus is justified because the Acting Director exceeded her statutory authority by applying assignor estoppel in contravention of clear and unambiguous statutory language and this Court’s precedent?”
2. “Whether...
1. “Is a patent claim directed to collecting, processing, and outputting a particular kind of video data using generic computer technology unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101?”
2. “If a jury...
On Appeal
1. “Whether the district court erred in holding that Cribl’s repeated, ongoing downloading, copying, and executing of the entire copyrighted Splunk Enterprise software to test and troubleshoot Cribl Stream...
1. “Did the Board err by applying the JHU Inventors’ statutorily-required ClinicalTrials.gov posting as prior art where the posting was made as part of a bona fide effort by the...
1. “Did the Director act in excess of statutory authority by awarding VLSI attorney fees in IPR2021-01064 where the statute does not ‘specifically and explicitly’ authorize an attorney fee award,...
“Whether [28 U.S.C.] § 1498 provides the exclusive remedy—a suit against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims—for Plaintiffs’ claims of (1) direct infringement and (2) indirect infringement...
“In the first reexamination of the ’385 Patent, the Board construed Claim 1 to require the claimed coupler to ‘be “designed to match the most common characteristic impedance of the...
1. “Whether this Court has jurisdiction over a direct appeal from a decision of the PTO denying institution of an inter partes review where the appeal raises a colorable constitutional...
1. “Whether the [Court of Federal Claims] erred when, contrary to the Florida principle of law that a condemning authority acquires only that interest necessary to achieve the limited purpose...
1. “Whether investments made before a patent issues can satisfy the economic prong of the domestic-industry requirement under 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(3), when the statute requires that qualifying investments be...
“Whether the CFC erred in ruling that Article XXIV of the income tax treaty between the United States and Canada allows a U.S. citizen residing in Canada to claim a...
