FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court denied two petitions raising questions related to inter partes review. That’s it! Here is a summary with links to the relevant case pages for more information.

Recently, a panel of the Federal Circuit granted panel rehearing in GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. In this case, Teva petitioned the en banc court to reconsider the panel’s decision that Teva induced infringement through use of a skinny label on its generic version of GlaxoSmithKline’s (GSK) drug Coreg. The panel treated the petition as requesting panel rehearing, granted the petition, and ordered a second oral argument in the case, which was held this morning. Here are the details of the case.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a trademark case and a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

• 2G or Not 2G: Patent License Applies to Future Generation Wireless Networks – Despite Evolved Wireless’s efforts to limit a licensing agreement for a cellular network patent to 3G Networks, the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision to give “generation” a broad construction.
• Apple, AT&T, Verizon Keep Patent Validity Suits in California – VoIP-Pal.com was unable to convince the Federal Circuit to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Northern District of California to transfer its cases to the Western District of Texas.
• Federal Circuit Says PTAB Wrongly Upheld Cancer Detection Patent – The Federal Circuit overruled the PTAB’s finding of no invalidity of Melanoscan’s patent in Canfield Scientific, Inc. v. Melanoscan, LLC.

Here’s the latest.

Last week, the Federal Circuit decided In re VoIP-Pal.com, Inc., a patent case we have been tracking because it attracted an amicus brief. Judge Moore authored a unanimous panel opinion denying VoIP-Pal’s petition for a writ of mandamus. The panel found that the district court did not clearly abuse its discretion by declining to dismiss the case based on the first-to-file rule. This is our opinion summary.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case over a dissent from Judge Dyk, and also issued a nonprecedential opinion in a “Rails-to-Trails” takings case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

• Federal Circuit Rules PTAB Erred on Successor-in-Interest Issue in Crocs Case – The Federal Circuit granted a motion to substitute in a case involving a design patent infringement issue between Mojave Desert Holdings, LLC and Crocs, Inc. (Crocs).
• Apple Asks To Postpone March Patent Trial Due To COVID-19 – Apple requested that the Federal Circuit postpone its patent trial to later in 2021 when the trial participants will have had a chance to be vaccinated.

Here’s the latest.

This week we are previewing three cases on the Federal Circuit’s oral argument schedule next week that attracted amicus briefs. Today we highlight a tax case, National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of the Treasury. In this case, the Department of the Treasury appeals a decision by the U.S. Court of International Trade holding that regulations promulgated by the Treasury to curtail “double drawback” (two tax refunds for the same exported merchandise) are invalid. This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case, a nonprecedential opinion in a government contracts case, and a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. The court also issued a nonprecedential order in a patent case denying a petition for a writ of mandamus that would have directed the Northern District of California to vacate an order denying a motion to dismiss based on the first-to-file doctrine. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case reversing in part and vacating in part a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The court also issued a nonprecedential in another patent case, this time affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.