FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, three nonprecedential opinions, three nonprecedential orders, and six Rule 36 summary affirmances. One of the precedential opinions addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals. The other precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a district court judgment in a patent case and addresses indefiniteness. Two of the three nonprecedential opinions affirm judgments of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The third nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims in a pro se case. The orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals and summary affirmances.

Here is an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today with respect to these cases we highlight four new cases that attracted amicus briefs: a patent case, a takings case, a veterans case, and a Little Tucker Act case. Additionally, we highlight two new reply briefs filed in patent cases. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, one nonprecedential opinion, and two nonprecedential dismissals. One of the precedential opinions addresses an appeal from five final written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The other precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in a patent infringement case. The nonprecedential opinion affirms an arbitrator’s decision in a dispute over removal from a role with the United States Marshals Service. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders.

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

• a blog post discussing a recent Federal Circuit decision that “provides a lesson into the importance of carefully drafting—and understanding—the scope of licensing terms, especially covenants not to sue”; and
• an article about how a “Federal Circuit Court of Appeals panel . . . denied an Oklahoma landowner’s bid to overturn a lower court’s ruling that the federal government isn’t liable for flooding damage to her property due to activity at a nearby Cherokee Nation casino.”

This morning and late Friday, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. They precedential opinion addresses a pro se appeal from an arbitrator’s decision regarding termination from the Federal Bureau of Prisons. One of the nonprecedential opinions addresses an appeal from a final decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. The other nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The three orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. In total, the court will convene 14 panels to consider 64 cases. Of these 64 cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 50. The Federal Circuit is providing access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, five cases scheduled for oral argument attracted amicus briefs. Here’s what you need to know about these five cases.

As we’ve been reporting, five cases being argued in March at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of these cases is Ireland v. United States. In it, the Federal Circuit will review a decision by the Western District of Texas to grant a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in an unemployment benefits case under the Little Tucker Act. This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential order, and one dismissal. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims in case involving claims under the Tucker Act. The nonprecedential order dismisses a case for lack of jurisdiction. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order.

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

• an article discussing “what’s at stake in pending Federal Circuit design patent case”;
• an article highlighting a recent notice by the USPTO published in the Federal Register “providing updated guidance for agency decision-makers on proper determinations of obviousness under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.”; and
• an article about how “[t]he Federal Circuit reversed a district court judge’s dismissal of a breach-of-contract lawsuit against MasterCard International Inc. over a licensing agreement the company entered with patent owner AlexSam Inc.”

As we have been reporting, five cases being argued in March at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of these cases is Lemon Bay Cove LLC v. United States. In it, the Federal Circuit will review a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, which held that the denial of a wetland permit by the United States Army Corps of Engineers was not a categorical taking or regulatory taking of Lemon Bay’s land. This is our argument preview.