FedCircuitBlog

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article reporting how the Federal Circuit concluded that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board “did not improperly place the burden of persuasion for proving unpatentability of proposed substitute claims . . . on [the patent owner].”
• another article highlighting an upcoming Federal Circuit argument concerning constitutional standing; and
• a blog post discussing “the scope of ‘comparison prior art’ available for the ordinary observer infringement analysis” in design patent cases.

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit, with hearings starting today. The Federal Circuit is providing access to live audio of each panel scheduled for argument via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. In total, the court will convene four panels to consider about 25 cases. Of these 25 cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 15. Of these argued cases, one case attracted an amicus brief. Here’s what you need to know about that case.

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article discussing Moderna’s claim “that Pfizer and BioNTech unlawfully copied Moderna’s inventions”;
• an article summarizing the Federal Circuit recent ruling “that ‘plain meaning’ [of patent claims] cannot be interpreted in a vacuum”; and
• a third article highlighting the Federal Circuit’s decision to allow Apple and several other tech companies to “continue to import and sell their smartphone devices.”

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. In the opinion, the court explains that it affirms both the Board’s finding that a substitute claim is unpatentable as obvious and the Board’s denial of a motion to amend. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. With respect to petitions, a brief in opposition and a reply brief were submitted in two patent cases raising questions related to patent law’s written description requirement. The government also waived its right to respond to a petition filed in a tax case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the International Trade Commission. In the opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission’s determination of no infringement and a lack of domestic industry as to one patent and, with respect to an expired patent, vacated and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss due to the patent’s expiration. Notably, in the course of analyzing infringement of the first patent, the court highlighted that “a computer-implemented claim drawn to a functional capability requires some showing that the accused computer-implemented device is programmed or otherwise configured, without modification, to perform the claimed function when in operation.” The Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential order denying a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the appeal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and text from the order.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. In a pending en banc case, the appellant filed his opening en banc brief. In it, he argues on-the-job exposure to the recent novel coronavirus entitled federal correctional officers to additional pay pursuant to various federal statutes. Here are the details.

In June, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc. v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, a case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, Military-Veterans Advocacy petitioned the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to issue a rule that would presume Agent Orange herbicide exposure for veterans who had served during specified periods in Guam or Johnston Island. After VA denied MVA’s petition, MVA petitioned the Federal Circuit to set aside VA’s denial and remand the case for rulemaking. In an opinion authored by Judge Prost and joined by Judges Newman and Cunningham, the Federal Circuit denied MVA’s petition. This is our opinion summary.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a tax case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. In the opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and denial of a request for a default order. The Federal Circuit also released two errata and a nonprecedential order granting an unopposed motion to lift a stay and remand to the Court of Federal Claims. Here is the introduction to the opinion, text from the order, and links to the errata.