FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on activity in patent cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases have attracted 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 three recent opinions in cases raising questions related to patent eligibility, Article III standing, and infringement; one newly identified case raising a question related to infringement that attracted three amicus briefs; one recent oral argument in a case that raised questions related to sanctions, one new response brief in a case that raised questions related to patent eligibility, and one new principal and response brief in a case that raised questions related to sanctions and obviousness. Here are the details.

Earlier this month the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Oath Holdings Inc., a patent case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, Arendi S.A.R.L. appealed a judgment of a district court, raising questions concerning patent eligibility, claim construction, indefiniteness, and infringement. In an opinion authored by Judge Linn and joined by Judges Dyk and Hughes, the court affirmed the judgment. This is our summary of the opinion.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and four nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. One nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, one comes in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade, one comes in patent case appealed from the District of Delaware, and the last opinion comes in response to a petition for review of a decision from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Oath Holdings Inc., a patent case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In it, Arendi appeals a judgment of a district court, raising questions concerning patent eligibility, claim construction, indefiniteness, and infringement. Judges Dyk, Linn, and Hughes heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a judgment in a case involving claims of design and utility patent infringement. The nonprecedential opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the orders requires the parties to seek clarification of a final judgment in a patent case, while two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the first order and links to the dismissals.

Here is an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the case involves 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 two new response briefs, one in a case raising questions related to whether a district court erred in denying a motion to intervene and to unseal court records and another in a patent case involving a challenge to a district court’s injunction requiring the delisting of patents from the Food and Drug Administration’s Orange Book; two new reply briefs, one in a patent case raising questions related to eligibility, claim construction, and infringement and another in a patent case raising questions related to eligibility; and five new amicus briefs in the patent case challenging the delisting of patents from the Orange Book. Here are the details.

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

• an article about a “multibillion-dollar patent infringement case at the Federal Circuit”;
• another article about the declining number of Delaware patent filings; and
• a blog post about the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issuing sanctions based on abuse of the inter partes review process.

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

• a first article concerning “the importance of adhering to local rules on initial disclosures in Delaware” after the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a patent case;
• a second article about Apple potentially escaping a $576 million judgment against it in a patent case; and
• a third article discussing the Federal Circuit’s reopening to the public yesterday.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. In its opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of a patent infringement complaint under the duplicative-litigation doctrine. The Federal Circuit also released three nonprecedential opinions. The first and second opinions come in veterans cases appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the third comes in an employment case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.