FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, an opening merits brief and an amicus brief were submitted in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case. Five new petitions were filed, one in a personnel case and four related to the same pro se case. Additionally, three briefs in opposition were filed, one in response to a petition raising a question related to the jurisdiction of the Court of International Trade and two in response to a petition raising a question related to patent eligibility. Finally, a reply in support of a petition was filed in a case addressing hazardous duty pay for federal employees. Here are the details.

Today, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, three nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal from the Patent and Trademark Office and addresses whether a patent is unpatentable as anticipated by, or obvious in view of, asserted prior art.  One of the nonprecedential opinions involves a pro se litigant seeking review of a final decision of the Merit System Protection Board. The second nonprecedential opinion, also litigated pro se, addresses an alleged violation of the First Amendment. The final nonprecedential opinion involves an appeal from a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision regarding the patentability of claims. The three nonprecedential orders deny petitions for writs of mandamus. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include the filing of an opening en banc brief in an en banc case reconsidering the longstanding test governing design patent obviousness and the denial of a petition raising questions related to obviousness.

Today, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and three nonprecedential orders. The first opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and addresses obviousness. The second opinion comes in another patent case appealed from a district court and addresses several issues. Two of the orders dismiss appeals for failure to pay docketing fees and one dismisses for failure to file a brief within the permitted time. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

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

• an article discussing oral arguments at the Federal Circuit in three appeals between Masimo Corp. and Apple Inc. involving “a series of Patent Trial and Appeal Board rulings that inventions described in Masimo’s patents were obvious and therefore unpatentable”;
• an article about how LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Tech. Operations holds the potential to make changes to the longstanding test for design patent obviousness; and
• an article analyzing the potential impact of a former soldier’s argument that the “U.S. Supreme Court [should] reverse a Federal Circuit decision that he claimed wrongly reduced his access to increased benefits Congress granted to wartime veterans.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions: one in a patent case addressing an appeal from a summary judgment of noninfringement and another in a trademark case addressing priority and likelihood of confusion. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four opinions: a precedential opinion in a patent case addressing obviousness, a nonprecedential opinion in a pro se case addressing an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims related to subject matter jurisdiction, and two nonprecedential opinions in pro se cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal and a summary affirmance. Here are the introductions to the orders and links to the dismissal and the summary affirmance.

Last week, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Teradata Corporation v. SAP SE, a case we have been following because it attracted amicus briefs. In this case, the Federal Circuit considered an appeal asking it to review a district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing tying and trade secret claims. In an opinion authored by Judge Taranto and joined by Judges Lourie and Hughes, the Federal Circuit transferred the appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. This is our opinion summary.

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

• an article covering reactions to the recent recommendation by a special committee of Federal Circuit judges that “Judge Pauline Newman should be disciplined for refusing to comply with orders related to an investigation into her ability to perform her duties”;
• a blog post providing an update on the special committee’s recommendation; and
• an article about how Apple has argued to the Federal Circuit that the “U.S. International Trade Commission’s holding that Apple Watch imports should be banned for infringing another company’s patents risks turning the agency into a standard patent litigation forum, rather than one meant to rein in harmful trade practices.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions, one in a patent case addressing obviousness and one addressing jurisdiction in a case involving an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential orders, one transferring a case to a district court and another dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the order transferring a case, and a link to the dismissal.