FedCircuitBlog

On Wednesday, November 1, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Vidal v. Elster, a trademark case concerning the First Amendment. The Court granted review to consider whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s “refusal to register a mark under Section 1052(c) [of the Lanham Act] violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment when the mark contains criticism of a government official or public figure.” This is our argument preview.

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

• an article about how the “Federal Circuit . . . backed a pair of Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions that said Netflix failed to prove that two streaming patents were invalid”; and
• an article discussing how “Google waived its right to respond to a petition for writ of certiorari . . . filed by the inventors of a method for protecting computers from malware.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and six nonprecedential orders. The opinion addresses a consolidated appeal from two Patent Trial and Appeal Board final written decisions finding all challenged claims unpatentable. The majority affirmed both decisions, but in an opinion dissenting in part and concurring in part Judge Dyk asserted that the Board erred by not properly considering amendments made by the patentee during reexamination. One order transfers a case. The remaining five orders are dismissals. Here is the introduction to the opinion, selected text from the transfer, and links to the dismissals.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments next week in Vidal v. Elster, a trademark case. With respect to petitions, one new petition was filed with the Court in a patent case. Additionally, a waiver of right to respond was filed in the same patent case, and a reply brief was filed in support of a petition asking the Court to consider whether the deadline to file a petition to review a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board is jurisdictional. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and four nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion rejects the argument the Patent Trial and Appeal Board failed to address several arguments made in two inter partes review proceedings. The court found no error in the how the Board understood the arguments at issue, but in a dissenting opinion Judge Dyk disagrees with the court. Two of the four orders are dismissals, while the other two transfer cases—one to a circuit court of appeals and another to a district court. Here is the introduction to the precedential opinion, selected text from the transfers, and links to the dismissals.

One case being argued in November at the Federal Circuit attracted an amicus brief. In this case, Boyer v. United States, the Federal Circuit will review a decision by the Court of Federal Claims granting the government’s motion for summary judgment and denying the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Both motions related to a pay discrimination claim under the Equal Pay Act, and the appeal relates primarily to the plaintiff’s argument that the trial court relied only on salary history to establish an affirmative defense. This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. One affirms a judgment of the Court of Veterans Claims that it lacked jurisdiction and dismisses a petition for lack of jurisdiction. The other affirms a judgment in an appeal in an inter partes review in which the Patent Trial and Appeal Board determined that all claims were unpatentable. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

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

• an article discussing how the recent suspension of Federal Circuit Judge Newman “shows need for judicial reform”;
• an article authored by retired Federal Circuit Judge Paul Michel discussing his “thirty-five-year perspective on Intellectual Property, and where we stand now”; and
• another article highlighting how in a recent panel discussion “[f]ormer Federal Circuit Judge Paul Redmond Michel warned inventors that proposed patent reform bills during this session of Congress will be ‘dead on arrival’ if the inventor community fails to unite.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. One opinion addresses an appeal from the Court of International Trade. The other two opinions address appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board regarding patent claims which have been found unpatentable as obvious or anticipated. The nonprecedential orders are both dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential opinions and four nonprecedential orders. Two opinions address appeals from inter partes reexaminations before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Each of those appeals had a corresponding related appeal, which was subsequently dismissed as moot in a corresponding nonprecedential opinion. Finally, the fifth nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal regarding veterans’ disability benefits. The first nonprecedential order summarily affirms a judgment, another transfers an appeal to a district court, and the final two are dismissals. Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit also released one nonprecedential order dismissing appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the orders, and links to the dismissals.