FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Western District of Texas. In the opinion, the Federal Circuit explains why it affirms a judgment of invalidity for indefiniteness. The court also released two nonprecedential opinions, one in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and one in a patent case appealed from the Northern District of California. In the case appealed from the Northern District of California, the Federal Circuit affirms a judgment of invalidity for lack of eligibility. The court also released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and five nonprecedential opinions. In the precedential opinion, the court reversed a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board based on an incorrect interpretation of the patent statute in the context of determining what qualifies as prior art for use in an inter partes review proceeding. Of the nonprecedential opinions, one comes in a vaccine case, one in an international trade case, one in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and two in patent cases appealed from district courts. Notably, Judge Stark filed additional views in the international trade case, indicating potential disagreement with the court’s law governing differential pricing analyses, while Judge Prost filed a concurring opinion in the nonprecedential opinion reviewing a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, one nonprecedential opinion, and three nonprecedential orders. Both precedential opinions come in trade cases on appeal from the Court of International Trade. Notably, Judge Reyna dissented in both appeals. The lone nonprecedential opinion comes in a pro se case on appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board. All three nonprecedential orders dismiss appeals. Here is are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders. 

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. With respect to these cases, since our last update we highlight five new opinions, four in patent cases and one in a government contract case; two new argument recaps, one in a trademark case and one in a trade case; and three new cases, one a design patent case and two utility patent cases. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and two nonprecedential orders. The lone nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent case on appeal from Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Of the nonprecedential orders, one dismisses an appeal and the other grants a motion to summarily affirm a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinion and order grating the motion to summarily affirm as well as a link to the dismissal. 

Earlier this month the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in AliveCor, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., a patent case that we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed three written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in related inter partes review proceedings. The PTAB found all claims of three patents unpatentable over certain asserted prior art. AliveCor challenged the PTAB’s findings, including by arguing that the IPR petitioner, Apple, violated its discovery obligations. The Federal Circuit, in an opinion authored by Judge Stark and joined by Judges Hughes and Linn, affirmed the PTAB’s obviousness determination and declined to address AliveCor’s discovery challenge because it failed to raise the issue at the PTAB. This is our opinion summary.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and four nonprecedential opinions. The lone precedential opinion comes in a patent case on appeal from the Northern District of West Virginia. Of the nonprecedential opinions, two come in patent cases on appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, one comes in a case on appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the other comes in a veterans case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case. Notably, Judge Dyk dissented from the majority’s holding affirming the Court of International Trade. This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. Both precedential opinions come in patent cases. Of the nonprecedential opinions, one comes in a patent case, while the other comes in a veterans case. All three nonprecedential orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders, each dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, three nonprecedential opinions, two summary affirmances, and two nonprecedential orders. The lone precedential opinions comes in a patent case on appeal from the International Trade Commission. Of the nonprecedential opinions, two come in a patent cases, while one comes in an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Both nonprecedential orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmances and dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, three nonprecedential opinions, and five nonprecedential orders. Of the precedential opinions, both come in patent cases on appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Of the nonprecedential opinions, one comes in an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board, one comes in an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the third comes in a takings case on appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. Of the nonprecedential orders, two deny petitions and the other three dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first two orders and links to the dismissals.