FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include new petitions filed in two cases raising questions related to obviousness; responses to petitions in two cases raising questions related to inequitable conduct, obviousness, and assignor estoppel; an invitation for a response to a petition raising questions related to standing; and the denial of four petitions raising questions related to claim construction and the Appointments Clause. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit did not issue any opinions.

As reported in our news post this morning, following a period of public comment, the Federal Circuit announced that it has adopted amendments to the Federal Circuit Rules of Practice and the Federal Circuit Attorney Discipline Rules. These amendments take effect July 1, 2020, and will apply to all cases filed or pending on or after July 1.

• Dropbox’s Claims Covered Only Abstract Ideas – The Federal Circuit dismissed all three patent infringement claims against Synchronoss.
• Spinco’s Petition for Mandamus Denied – First-filed status is not yet determined by which court first secures personal jurisdiction over the parties.
• Federal Circuit Adopts New Amendment to the Federal Rules of Practice – After a period of public comment, the court has adopted new amendments to the Federal Circuit Rules of Practice and Federal Circuit Attorney Discipline Rules.

Here’s the latest.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one nonprecedential Rule 36 judgment. Here is the judgment.

Here is this month’s 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 patent cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases we highlight one disposition, one new case, two recent oral arguments, and one upcoming oral argument.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one precedential opinion in a takings case and one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

• New Suits Against Amazon Barred Under Claim Preclusion – Relying on a 1907 decision, the Federal Circuit bars suits against Amazon’s customers.
• Supreme Court Will Not Hear Eli Lilly Patent Appeal – This week, the Supreme Court denied two petitions both relating to a chemotherapy treatment for lung cancer.
• Federal Circuit Upholds Dumping Duties – Chinese solar cell companies were kept accountable for dumping thanks to a recent Federal Circuit ruling.

Here’s the latest.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued three nonprecedential orders: one granting two petitions to appeal an interlocutory order certified by the Court of Federal Claims; one denying a petition for a writ of mandamus to order a district court to transfer a case; and one denying a petition for a writ of prohibition against the Court of Federal Claims. Here is text from the orders.

This post summarizes recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit.

• The Supreme Court received six new petitions this week in (1) BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc., v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., (2) Phazzer Electronics, Inc. v. Taser International, Inc., (3) Lakshmi Arunachalam v. Presidio Bank., (4) Lakshmi Arunachalam v. Apple, Inc., et al., (5) Lakshmi Arunachalam v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and (6) Betzaida P. Jernigan v. Robert Wilkie, Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
• In Comcast Corp. v. International Trade Commission, Comcast submitted its reply to the ITC’s brief in opposition.
• Finally, the State of Indiana submitted identical amicus briefs in favor of the petitioners in both Jake LaTurner, Kansas State Treasurer v. United States and Andrea Lea, Arkansas State Auditor v. United States.

Here are the details.