Petitions / Supreme Court Activity

Recent Supreme Court Activity

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, the Supreme Court issued its opinion last week in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed in a patent case and a pro se case, and the Court denied a petition in another pro se case. Here are the details.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – April 19, 2024

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and two nonprecedential dismissals. One of the opinions, in a case that attracted an amicus brief, addresses a petition for review from a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The other opinion addressed an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders.

Read More
Federal Circuit Announcement

Federal Circuit Announces Temporary Service Unavailability on April 26, 2024

This morning, the Federal Circuit released an announcement stating that the Clerk’s Office and Circuit Library will be temporarily unavailable for public services and support on April 26, 2024. Here is the text of the announcement.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – April 18, 2024

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. Both address pro se appeals from decisions of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are their introductions.

Read More
Argument Recap

Argument Recap – Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc.

As we have been reporting, earlier this month the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in four cases that attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., in which the Federal Circuit is reviewing a determination by a judge in the District of Colorado to grant Crocs’ motion for summary judgment on a Lanham Act claim. This is our argument recap.

Read More
Opinions / Supreme Court Activity

Opinion Summary — Rudisill v. McDonough

Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case previously decided by the Federal Circuit. In a seven to two decision, the Court reversed and remanded the Federal Circuit’s ruling in the case, finding that “[v]eterans who separately accrue benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills are entitled to both benefits” up to a 48-month aggregate benefits cap. Justice Jackson authored the Court’s majority opinion, which was joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Justice Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Barrett, filed a concurring opinion. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Alito, filed a dissenting opinion. This is our opinion summary.

Read More
En Banc Activity

Recent En Banc Activity

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include a new petition filed in a patent case raising a question at the intersection of infringement and claim construction, along with a denial of a petition in another patent case raising questions related to the domestic industry requirement at the International Trade Commission. Here are the details.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – April 17, 2024

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion. The opinion addresses a pro se petition for review of a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

Read More
Argument Recap

Argument Recap – Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.

This month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., a case that attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss inducement claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. This is our argument recap.

Read More
Opinions

Opinions & Orders – April 16, 2024

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. One addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The other opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Read More