FedCircuitBlog

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 the exclusion of expert testimony related to patent damages;
• an article indicating that recent Federal Circuit opinions have created “a blueprint for companies that want to get cases moved out of the nation’s fledgling patent-dispute hotbed”; and
• a report on the outcome of one of Apple’s challenges to patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

This morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions, one in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and three in pro se cases, two appealed from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board and one appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

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. As for pending petitions, since our last update two new petitions were filed: one in a patent case presenting questions regarding the Appointments Clause and one in a pro se patent case presenting a question concerning patent eligibility. In addition, two amicus briefs were filed in the same case in support of the petitioner, who raised questions concerning inter partes review. Moreover, two briefs in opposition were filed in patent cases raising questions related to the Appointments Clause. Finally, the government filed a supplemental brief in a government contracts case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. The opinion addresses arguments the district court erred with regard to claim construction. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

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.