FedCircuitBlog

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights Reuters’ reporting on a recent Federal Circuit decision, an article about litigation funding firms “betting big” on a particular outcome at the Supreme Court, and recent comments on a pending petition for certiorari.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued three precedential opinions in patent cases and one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. In granted cases, the Court issued orders on motions for divided arguments and received two reply briefs. In petitions cases, the Court granted a petition, denied two petitions, and received a new petition and several briefs.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights a New York Times article on the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., a Bloomberg News article on a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing to discuss the Arthrex ruling, and an IPWatchdog post discussing Chestnut Hill’s recent petition for certiorari in Chestnut Hill Sound Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Once a month we provide an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve at least one amicus brief. Today we highlight recent activity in six such cases. We introduced four of these cases last month in a previous blog post. Of the two new cases, one concerns an attempt to vacate a judgment of non-infringement of a patent in favor of a settlement agreement, and the other questions whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may consider eligibility challenges to amended patent claims filed in inter partes review proceedings.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. This week six new petitions were filed, along with a response to a petition and a reply in support of a petition. The Court denied one petition. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued one precedential opinion in a patent case, one nonprecedential opinion in a trademark case, one nonprecedential opinion in a Court of Federal Claims case, and six nonprecedential Rule 36 judgements. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a list of the Rule 36 judgments.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit.

One type of case we track here at Fed Circuit Blog is any patent case pending before a panel where an amicus brief has been filed. Besides identifying these cases, aggregating related data (e.g., briefs, oral argument recordings, orders, and opinions), and making this data available using our “Other Cases” page, once a month we plan to provide a blog post summarizing recent activity in these cases. Today we do that with respect to eight such patent cases. Of these cases, three concern the non-obviousness requirement; two include jurisdictional questions; one pertains to infringement; one discusses F/RAND commitments; and one raises the issue of patent eligibility.

Another case we’re following from the Federal Circuit’s October sitting is VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc., which involves review of a judgment of $502 million in damages for patent infringement. Here is a recap of the oral argument, which was held last Friday before Judges Lourie, Mayer, and Taranto.