“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...
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...
“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.”
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...
“Whether the Board acted contrary to law or arbitrarily and capriciously in denying SIPCO’s motion seeking leave to request a certificate of correction from the Director of the Patent Office,...
“Whether the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Veterans Court) misinterpreted the plain language of 38 U.S.C. §§ 3322 and 3327 in holding that the election provisions expressly contained therein...
“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...
“Whether the Government commits a categorical physical taking when it uses its legislative authority to require the abandonment or total destruction of lawfully acquired personal property.”
“Whether the Government commits a...
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...
“Whether the Board erred by rejecting Petitioner’s own expert’s claim construction of ‘wearable’ in the Patents’ context as ‘unobtrusive and easily hidden’ (like performer bodypacks are), and further erred by...
“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...
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...
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...
“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...
“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...
“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...
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...
“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...
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...
