FedCircuitBlog

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article suggesting “Texas’ reputation as the nation’s top venue for patent disputes hasn’t faded”;
• an article arguing a recent Federal Circuit ruling related to patent marking “will complicate licensing talks” between patent owners and prospective licensees and “and give defendants a route to limit or escape damages in some cases”;
• a press release reporting how, “[o]n the eve of the 250th anniversary of Independence Day, in the nation’s capital, the Federal Circuit Center for Innovation and Law invited the public to the Justice Up Close, History All Around civics program”; and
• an article “ranking the Circuit Courts by importance.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released five precedential opinions, three nonprecedential opinions, and one nonprecedential order. Two of the precedential opinions come in tax cases appealed from the Court of Federal Claims and address whether bilateral tax treaties relieve U.S. taxpayers from double taxation with respect to the net investment income tax. Two other precedential opinions come in patent cases, one appealed from the Eastern District of Texas and the other from the District of Delaware. The fifth precedential opinion comes in an appeal from a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. As for the nonprecedential opinions, two come in related patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board involving the same parties, and the third comes in another patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. The order dismisses an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the order.

Two cases being argued at the Federal Circuit in September attracted amicus briefs. One of these cases is Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., a patent case. In this case, Netlist appeals a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review, which invalidated a claim of a Netlist patent. This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. Both opinions come in patent cases appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. One affirms a dismissal on both venue and eligibility grounds. The other finds the court lacks jurisdiction over a settlement agreement dispute and transfers the case to the Fifth Circuit. One of today’s orders effectuates the transfer, and the other lifts a stay and partially dismisses consolidated appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions along with links to the orders.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• a piece arguing the Federal Circuit’s 2026 docket reveals a “recurring concern” with threshold questions of “standing, jurisdiction, reviewability, finality and adjudicative authority” that cut across substantive fields;
• an article reporting on a new petition for writ of certiorari arguing the Federal Circuit has effectively collapsed the Supreme Court’s two-step eligibility framework into “a single inquiry”; and
• a commentary explaining how a recent Federal Circuit decision sharpened the “skilled searcher” standard for determining what prior art grounds a petitioner “reasonably could have raised” under the statutory inter partes review estoppel provision.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. This morning, the court released three nonprecedential opinions and four nonprecedential orders. Two of the opinions come in related patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board involving the same parties, Apple Inc. and Smart Mobile Technologies LLC. The other opinion comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. As for today’s orders, one dismisses an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims for lack of jurisdiction, one remands a patent case from the District of Delaware following the parties’ settlement, one dismisses appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board by agreement of the parties, and one transfers a Merit Systems Protection Board petition to the Eastern District of Arkansas. Here are the introductions to the opinions as well as links to the orders.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. There are currently no pending cases previously decided by the Federal Circuit. As for pending petitions, since our last update, two new petitions were filed in a patent case and a pro se case; four waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in two patent cases and a pro se case; and one brief in opposition was filed in an Indian Tucker Act case. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and four nonprecedential orders. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade involving the scope of an antidumping duty order on certain artist canvas from China. The other nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Two of the nonprecedential orders summarily affirm judgments of the Court of Federal Claims—one in a case involving tort claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and another in a case involving mortgage-related claims barred under 28 U.S.C. § 1500. The third order dismisses a veterans case as untimely. Finally, the fourth order grants a joint stipulation to voluntarily dismiss a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.

The Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders this morning on its website.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article suggesting that “[t]wo decisions issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit within the past couple of months have brought” the difference between patent and trademark preemptive infringement remedies “into sharper focus”;
• a blog post discussing how “[p]atent filings are now mined not only by competitors, but by governments, intelligence agencies, sovereign investors, and increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence systems capable of analyzing millions of documents simultaneously”;
• an article highlighting how “[t]wo important patent prosecution data points that are in tension: [t]he vast majority of patent applications are initially rejected by the patent examiner; and [t]he vast majority of patent applications eventually issue as a patent”; and
• an article arguing that, “over the past several months, the Trump administration has eroded” the Merit System Protection Board’s “authority in a series of steps that some former officials say have left the board a shell of the institution it once was.”