FedCircuitBlog

This morning, like yesterday, the Federal Circuit released only a single order, and again like yesterday it was a dismissal. We still have not seen any new opinions since last Wednesday. Here is a link to today’s dismissal.

Three cases being argued in December at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is Beaudette v. McDonough, a veterans case. In it, the Federal Circuit will review whether the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims erred in issuing a writ of mandamus to allow the Board of Veterans’ Appeals to hear appeals of adverse decisions pertaining to the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers. This is our argument preview.

For the first time since last Wednesday, the Federal Circuit released an order (albeit still no opinions) this morning on its website. It is a dismissal. Here is a link to it.

Here is an 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 cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today, with respect to these cases we highlight two recent opinions in cases that attracted amicus briefs: one a patent case and one a trade case; three new cases we have identified that attracted amicus briefs: a takings case, a trademark case, and a veterans case; and new briefing in several cases that previously attracted amicus briefs: a new response brief in a patent case, two new reply briefs in patent cases, and supplemental briefing in a pro se case. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed with the Court, one in a veterans case and one in a pro se case. Additionally a waiver of right to respond was filed in a pro se case and an amicus brief was filed in a patent case raising a question related to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. Finally, the Court denied petitions in a Tucker Act case and in a takings case. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include a new petition in a patent case raising a question concerning prior art for purposes of design patent law and two denials of petitions in two other patent cases raising questions related to the law governing reissue proceedings and fee shifting, respectively. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a “rails-to-trials” takings case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims and a nonprecedential opinion in a trademark case appealed from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Late yesterday the Federal Circuit also dismissed an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article discussing a recent Federal Circuit judicial council brief that “pushes back on Judge Newman’s arguments that her colleagues should have recused themselves from the investigation, that she should have been allowed on the council and that the council was acting beyond its judicial duties by acting as an administrative body”; and
• another article about a recent decision from the Patent and Trademark Office “that limits the effect of a 2015 Federal Circuit decision regarding the dates of earlier inventions cited in patent applications.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding certain claims unpatentable either for lack of written description or anticipation. Notably, the court affirmed the Board’s judgment despite arguments that the Board issued the final written decision after the statutory deadline and thus lacked jurisdiction. The nonprecedential opinion addresses a pro se appeal from a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Finally, the order grants a motion for voluntary dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Boyer v. United States. In this case, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a decision by the Court of Federal Claims to grant the government’s motion for summary judgment of a pay discrimination claim under the Equal Pay Act. The appeal relates primarily to the plaintiff’s argument that the trial court incorrectly relied only on salary history to establish its affirmative defense. Judges Dyk, Chen, and Stoll heard the parties’ arguments. This is our argument recap.