FedCircuitBlog

How J.E.M. and Chakrabarty Make the Case for DABUS – Kirk Hartung wrote an article for IPWatchDog about J.E.M. Ag Supply, Inc., v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. and Diamond v. Chakrabarty, discussing their impact on patent protection with resect to inventions created using artificial intelligence.

Teva to Defend Ruling Allowing Narcan Generic at Federal Circuit – Perry Cooper posted an article on BloombergLaw reporting that a three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit will consider an appeal in Adapt Pharma Operations v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. and if the decision is upheld, “[Narcan] generics can come to market 15 years sooner.”

Apple Asks SCOTUS to Hear Inter Partes Review Appeal – In an article on LawStreetMedia, Christina Tabacco writes about a case involving Apple and Optis Cellular Technology LLC, Optis Wireless Technology, LLC, and Unwired Planet International Limited.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent infringement case, affirming a denial of a motion to dismiss for lack of standing over a dissent by Judge Newman. The court also issued a nonprecedential order granting a petition for a writ of mandamus directing the Western District of Texas to transfer a case to the Central District of California. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order.

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit, with hearings starting this morning. This month the Federal Circuit is again providing access to live audio of each panel scheduled for argument via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. In total, the court will convene five panels to consider about 23 cases. Of these 23 cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 17. Of the argued cases, four attracted amicus briefs. All four are Tucker Act cases presenting the same issues. Indeed, the court consolidated the cases, and they will be argued at same time with 40 minutes of argument allocated to each side. Here’s what you need to know about these four cases.

This afternoon the Federal Circuit announced revised restrictions on access to the National Courts Building, restrictions that will be effective tomorrow through August 31. Here is the text of today’s announcement.

Four cases that attracted amicus briefs are being argued at the Federal Circuit next week: Arrowood Indemnity Co. v. United States, Cacciapalle v. United States, Owl Creek Asia I, L.P. v. United States, Fairholme Funds, Inc. v. United States. In these cases, the plaintiffs asserted claims at the Court of Federal Claims based on government actions related to the 2008 financial crisis and ownership of shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. As explained by the Court of Federal Claims in one of the cases, the “plaintiffs seek the return of money illegally exacted, damages for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty, and compensation for a taking pursuant to the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” The Court of Federal Claims, however, dismissed these claims, finding it “lacks jurisdiction to entertain their fiduciary duty and implied-in-fact-contract claims, and plaintiffs lack standing to pursue any of their claims.” The plaintiffs have now appealed to the Federal Circuit, challenging the lower court’s holdings. The Federal Circuit consolidated these cases for purposes of oral argument. Here is our argument preview.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion invalidating three regulations issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs as inconsistent with the text of the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act. Here is the introduction to the opinion.

Federal Circuit Judge Kathleen O’Malley to Retire Next March – Blake Brittain reports for Reuters about how Judge O’Malley, appointed by President Obama in 2010, will retire next March.

O’Malley Retirement Leaves Fed. Cir. With No Ex-Trial Judges – Perry Cooper also reports about Judge O’Malley’s retirement on BloombergLaw.com, noting that “O’Malley is [the] court’s only former district court judge.”

Federal Circuit Nixes Appeal on Claims of Unfair Treatment by California Court in Pro Se Lawsuit Over Restrictions to Cancer Research – Steve Brachmann writes on IPWatchDog.com about the Federal Circuit’s nonprecedential decision in Siegler v. Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc.

Possible Vaccine Mandate for Federal Employees Raises Host of Tricky Questions, Attorneys Say – In an article on FederalNewsNetwork.com, Nicole Ogrysko writes about a 2002 Federal Circuit case, Mazares v. Department of the Navy, and how it may impact mandatory COVID-19 vaccines for the federal work force.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and a nonprecedential opinion in an employment case appealed from an arbitration. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Last Friday the Federal Circuit sua sponte vacated its June 30, 2021 panel decision in Taylor v. McDonough, a veterans case asking whether a veteran was entitled to an earlier effective date for his benefits due to restraints on his ability to disclose his participation in “chemical agent exposure studies at the Edgewood Arsenal in Edgewood, Maryland (Edgewood Program).” The Federal Circuit also granted en banc review of the case. According to Friday’s order, the en banc court will consider whether application of the doctrine of equitable estoppel to provide the veteran with the earlier effective date violates the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause and, conversely, whether denial of the earlier effective date violates the constitutional right-of-access doctrine. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a veterans case, reversing a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The court also issued a nonprecedential opinion dismissing an appeal in another case appealed from the same court. Here are the introductions to the opinions.