FedCircuitBlog

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. In total, the court will convene 8 panels to consider 43 cases. Of these cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 35. The Federal Circuit is providing access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, three cases scheduled for oral argument attracted amicus briefs. Here’s what you need to know about these three cases.

There are three cases that will be argued this month at the Federal Circuit that attracted amicus briefs. Last week we reported on two of these cases. The third is AliveCor, Inc. v. International Trade Commision. In this case, the Federal Circuit will review a judgment of the International Trade Commission in a patent infringement dispute between AliveCor, Inc. and Apple Inc. On the one hand, the Commission found that certain patent claims asserted by AliveCor are invalid under under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and that certain claims are not infringed by Apple. The Commission also found that other claims are not invalid and are infringed. Both AliveCor and Apple appealed. This is our argument preview.

As we mentioned on Monday, three cases that will be argued in July at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is AliveCor, Inc. v. Apple Inc., a patent case. In it, the Federal Circuit will review a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which held several of AliveCor’s patents to be invalid for obviousness. This is our argument preview.

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. Today with respect to these cases we highlight one new opinion in a veterans case and four new cases that attracted amicus briefs: a veterans case and three patent cases. We also highlight new briefing in two patent cases as well as recent oral arguments in a trademark case and veterans case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released three precedential opinions, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. The first precedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of International Trade, the second affirms a judgment of the District Court of New Jersey in a patent infringement case, and the third reverses-in-part, vacates-in-part, and remands-in-part a breach of contract case to the Court of Federal Claims. The nonprecedential opinion affirms-in-part, vacates-in-part, and remands a case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the order.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include a new petition raising a question about the correct interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) and denials of petitions in two cases raising questions related to obviousness. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and two Rule 36 judgments. The first opinion affirms a judgment in a pro se case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, and the second opinion dismisses an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for lack of jurisdiction. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include a new opinion in an en banc case addressing design patent law’s nonobviousness requirement; seven new petitions raising questions related to nonobviousness, claim construction, infringement, appellate review, and damages; and three denials of petitions raising questions related to definiteness, claim construction, infringement, licenses, and reduction to practice. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and six nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion, which attracted two amicus briefs, addresses an appeal from a final judgment of a district court holding certain patent claims invalid as obvious. Judge Cunningham filed an opinion dissenting in part. One of the nonprecedential opinions affirms four final written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, determining all claims are unpatentable over asserted prior art. The other nonprecedential opinion affirms a decision of the Merit Systems Protections Board. Two of the nonprecedential orders transfer appeals to other United States appellate courts. Four of the nonprecedential orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions, selected text from the transfer orders, and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and two nonprecedential dismissals. The first precedential opinion comes in a case involving allegations of infringement of numerous patents and addresses appeals from a summary judgment of infringement of a subset of claims, from a jury determination that remaining claims were not infringed, and from a determination that all asserted claims, including those infringed, were invalid. The second precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of a district court finding certain patent claims invalid, finding certain claims infringed, and entering a damage award in excess of $6 million. The third precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The fourth precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Each of the two nonprecedential opinions affirms a judgment—one of a district court in a patent case turning on patent eligibility, another of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.