FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received two new petitions raising questions related to the weight given to expert witness testimony during claim construction, the evidentiary basis of an invalidity finding, and the proper standard of review of agency determinations pursuant to Securities Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194 (1947). The court also received a response to a petition for rehearing en banc concerning deference to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The court also denied a petition for rehearing en banc in a case raising questions relating to patent eligibility. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions. The first comes in a patent case appealed from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and the second comes in a veterans case appealed from the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The Federal Circuit also issued a nonprecedential opinion in another veterans case and a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

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

• a post commenting on the Federal Circuit’s rehearing grant rates and how to achieve rehearing at the court;
• discussion of a letter sent by two U.S. senators to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office concerning patent law’s disclosure requirements; and
• an article discussing a recent case addressing subject matter eligibility of software claims based on improvement to computer functionality.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The cases address the patentability requirement of non-obviousness. The court also issued a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The court also issued two nonprecedential orders denying petitions for writs of mandamus in patent cases pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York and the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Finally, the court issued a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

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

• an article discussing the long-term impact of the Federal Circuit’s decision concerning two patents covering the drug Eliquis;
• a report detailing the ITC’s urging of the Federal Circuit to uphold its ruling of infringement of Jeep’s trade dress;
• an article discussing a recent bid protest in the context of challenging government agency decisions; and
• a report focusing on a precedential order by the Federal Circuit regarding the PTAB’s conclusion that it is not bound by agreements to arbitrate validity disputes.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The opinion addresses eligibility for post-grant review based on priority dates. The court also issued a nonprecedential order in another patent case denying a petition for writ of mandamus raising a question regarding the scope of statutory estoppel based on a prior inter partes review proceeding. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to the Supreme Court’s October 2021 term, the Court still has not granted any petitions in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, moreover, no new petitions have been filed with the Court. As for pending petitions, though, four new reply briefs and two waivers of right to respond were filed. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential order in a patent case dismissing appeals and denying a petition for a writ of mandamus concerning a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to institute inter partes review despite the alleged applicability of a prior agreement by the patent owner to arbitrate patent validity disputes. Notably, Judge O’Malley concurred-in-part and dissented-in-part. Here are the introductions to the order and Judge O’Malley’s opinion.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received three new petitions raising questions related to tolling for post-trial motions, the Federal Circuit’s reversal of a judgment in an inter partes review proceeding based on a teaching away finding, and a denial of a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order transfer. The court also invited a response to a petition concerning deference to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Lastly, the court denied petitions in two cases relating to transfer and the standard for review for petitions for writs of mandamus and a third case relating to patent eligibility. Here are the details.