FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. As for pending cases, since our last update the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit in President Trump’s tariffs case; a petitioner filed its opening merits brief in a patent case; and an amicus brief supporting the petitioner was filed in the same patent case. As for pending petitions, since our last update one new petition was filed in a patent case; a waiver of the right to respond to a petition was filed in a pro se case; a brief in opposition to a petition was filed in a patent case; a reply brief in support of a petition was filed in a patent case; six amicus briefs supporting the petitioner were filed in a takings case; and the Supreme Court denied petitions in two patent cases and three pro se cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, there has been no new activity at the Supreme Court in the only pending case decided by the Federal Circuit. As for petitions, a new petition was filed in a patent case addressing appellate procedure; waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in a patent case and five pro se cases; a reply brief in support of a petition was filed in a veterans case; and the Supreme Court denied petitions in ten cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, there has been no new activity at the Supreme Court in the only pending case decided by the Federal Circuit. As for petitions, there has been a lot of activity:

• eight new petitions were filed, one in a patent case and seven in pro se cases;
• nine waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in patent cases, a veterans case, an MSPB case, a government contracts case, and pro se cases;
• fourt briefs in opposition were filed in a Quiet Title Act case, a veterans case, and government contracts case;
• three reply briefs in support of petitions were filed in the same Quiet Title Act case, a trademark case, and the same government contracts case;
• sixteen amicus briefs have been filed two patent cases, a veterans case, and two takings cases;
• supplemental briefs were filed in a patent case and a pro se case; and
• the Supreme Court denied petitions in two patent cases, a takings case, a case addressing jurisdiction and a pro se case.

Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, the Federal Circuit invited a response to a petition raising a question related to the presumption of validity. The Federal Circuit also denied a petition for rehearing en banc in a patent case that asked the court to review questions related to claim construction. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the Federal Circuit issued two en banc opinions, one in a trade case, V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, and another in a government contract case, Percipient.ai, Inc. v. United States. Additionally, two petitions for en banc rehearing were filed in patent cases. One raises questions related to identification of real parties in interest in inter partes review proceedings. The other raises questions related to claim construction. Finally, a response was filed in opposition to a petition in another patent case raising questions related to estoppel and inter partes review. Here are the details.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals in patent cases. This morning, the court released two precedential opinions. One comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and one comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Additionally, the Federal Circuit released a precedential order denying en banc review in a patent case. Notably, Chief Judge Moore and Judge Stoll concurred and Judges Dyk and Hughes dissented from the decision to deny en banc review. Finally, the court issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case and two nonprecedential orders, one denying a petition for a writ of mandamus in a patent case and one dismissing a case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and one nonprecedential order. One opinion addresses an argument that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board adopted erroneous constructions of claim terms. Another opinion addresses an appeal from a summary judgment holding claims invalid for lack of eligibility. The final opinion, also from a patent case, addresses the enforceability of an arbitration agreement and a finding of indefiniteness. The nonprecedential order grants a voluntary dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.