FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, Judge Stoll dissented from the majority’s decision to reverse a final written description that had declined to hold certain patent claims invalid as obvious. Here are the introductions to the majority and dissenting opinions.

Late last month the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC, a patent case that attracted seven amicus briefs. In this case, Amneal alleged that Teva delayed the entry of generic products into the market by improperly listing certain patents in the Orange Book. The District of New Jersey agreed and required Teva to delist its patents from the Orange Book. Teva appealed, and the Federal Circuit stayed the lower courts order pending its resolution of the appeal. Late last month, in an opinion authored by Judge Prost and joined by Judge Taranto and Hughes, the Federal Circuit lifted the stay and affirmed the district court’s delisting order. This is our opinion summary.

As we highlighted yesterday, four cases scheduled to be argued in January at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is United Water Conservation District v. United States. In this case, United Water Conservation District appeals a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, which dismissed its takings claim. The court held that a restriction of water rights did not constitute a physical taking but rather a regulatory taking, which presented an unripe controversy. This is our argument preview.

Four cases being argued next month at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of these cases is Dinh v. United States. In it, the Federal Circuit will review a dismissal of a takings claim by the Court of Federal Claims. That court held that, because Congressional action did not explicitly devalue certain bonds or require transferring funds to repay the bonds to the Puerto Rican government, there was no taking. This is our argument preview.

The Federal Circuit announced today that it will be closed and not hold oral arguments previously scheduled for Thursday, January 9 in observance of the National Day of Mourning for President Carter. Here is the full text of the announcement.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. That’s it! Happy New Year!

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, earlier this month the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, and we have since posted our argument recap. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed in a patent case and a pro se case; waivers of the right to respond were filed in two patent cases, a case addressing Rule 36, and two pro se cases; briefs in opposition were filed in two patent cases; replies in support of petitions were filed in a patent case, a case addressing Rule 36, a veterans case, and a case addressing procedure; and six amicus briefs were filed in a case addressing Rule 36. In addition, the Court denied the petition in the case addressing procedure. Here are the details.

The Federal Circuit issued its opinion earlier this month in Metropolitan Area EMS Authority v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, a veterans case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a rule promulgated by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that permitted VA to pay the lesser of the actual charge or the Medicare fee schedule (MFS) amount for all non-contract ground and air ambulance transports. The petitioners in this case sought review of this rule. In an opinion authored by Judge Stoll and joined by Judges Lourie and Stark, the Federal Circuit granted the petition and set aside the rule as not in accordance with law given the governing statute. This is our opinion summary.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a veterans case, a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case, and a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, the court denied two petitions raising the same question related to claim construction. Here are the details.