Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. The Court granted the petition for certiorari in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case raising a question related to GI Bill educational assistance. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed, one in a patent and one in a pro se case; a brief in opposition was filed in a patent case concerning inter partes review estoppel; and the Court denied petitions in two patent cases and five pro se cases. Here are the details.
Recent Supreme Court Activity
Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. The Court granted the petition for certiorari in Vidal v. Elster, a trademark case raising a question related to the First Amendment. While no new petitions were filed with the Court, the Court requested a response to a petition raising a question concerning patent eligibility; a waiver of right to respond was filed in a pro se case; a reply brief was filed in a veterans case; and a supplemental brief was filed in a patent case raising a question concerning inter partes review estoppel. Here are the details.
Recent Supreme Court Activity
Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. While no new petitions were filed with the Court, waivers of right to respond were filed in two pro se cases; a brief in opposition was filed in a patent case; reply briefs in support of petitions were filed in a patent case and in two veterans cases; amicus briefs were filed in two patent cases; and the Court denied certiorari in three patent cases. Here are the details.
Recent News on the Federal Circuit
Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post discussing the Solicitor General’s amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to deny certiorari in a case concerning inter partes review estoppel; and
- an article highlighting takeaways from a recent precedential opinion by the Federal Circuit addressing analogousness of prior art references.
Recent News on the Federal Circuit
Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an article commenting on the recent Supreme Court ruling in Amgen v. Sanofi concerning patent law’s enablement requirement;
- an article highlighting the Biden administration urging the Supreme Court to deny certiorari in Apple v. Caltech, a case presenting a question about inter partes review estoppel;
- a post noting the effects of the Federal Circuit’s holding addressing inducement of infringement by so-called skinny labels in Teva v. GlaxoSmithKline after the Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case; and
- an article arguing the recent precedential opinion by the Federal Circuit in Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals addressing a limit on what qualifies as analogous prior art “adds to [the] toolbox for patentee prosecution and litigation success.”
Recent News on the Federal Circuit
Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an article about the potential impact on the value of patents for universities if the Supreme Court grants review in a recent case decided by the Federal Circuit;
- another article reporting how “U.S. District Judge Alan Albright won’t transfer a cryptographic data technology patent suit against Microsoft Corp.”; and
- a blog post about a district court finding a patent that “covers a process for allowing users to upload ‘dynamic albums’ to be stored on their devices” to be patent ineligible.
Recent News on the Federal Circuit
Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post about the U.S. Supreme Court asking the Solicitor General “to provide its views on [a] petition asking the High Court to clarify the proper application of estoppel in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings”;
- an article about the Federal Circuit rejecting a “claim that the U.S. Supreme Court has implicitly overruled key design patent validity tests”; and
- another article about the Federal Circuit’s recent en banc decision that “overturned an earlier decision that would have allowed veterans to receive up to an additional year of education.”
Recent Supreme Court Activity
Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. With respect to petitions, although no new petitions were filed, the Court invited the Solicitor General to file a brief expressing the views of the United States in a patent case related to inter partes review estoppel. Here are the details.
Recent Supreme Court Activity
Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, Amgen filed its opening merits brief in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC, which concerns patent law’s enablement requirement. With respect to petitions, although no new petitions were filed with the Court, a brief in opposition and a reply brief were filed in patent case concerning inter partes review estoppel, and another reply brief was filed in a veterans case. Here are the details.
Recent News on the Federal Circuit
Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post about the Federal Circuit granting a petition for writ of mandamus to transfer claims from the Western District of Texas to the District of Colorado;
- an article about the California Institute of Technology urging the Supreme Court “not to take up a $1.1 billion patent infringement dispute between the university and Apple”; and
- another article about the Federal Circuit denying a “motion to stop . . . performance of a $133 million US Navy base operations support services contract.”
- 1
- 2