FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received three new petitions this week raising issues concerning the scope of appellate review, patent eligibility, and the extent of estoppel with respect to claim constructions. Additionally, the court invited responses in two cases addressing the court’s jurisdiction and the case addressing the extent of estoppel in claim constructions. Lastly, the court denied petitions in three cases raising questions related to patent eligibility, inventorship, and the evaluation of expert opinions. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. In patent cases, the court received four new petitions this week, addressing issues of claim construction, the replacement of a primary prior art reference after institution by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the evaluation of patent eligibility, and contractual patent ownership. The court also received a response to a petition that raised a question related to the power of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to terminate an instituted proceeding on the eve of a merits-based final written decision. Here are the details.

• Can a Patent Violate the Laws of Chemistry and Physics? – In this blog post, Audrey Millemann of TheIPBlog.com explains that the quick answer is no, patents may not violate the laws of chemistry and physics.
• Federal Circuit Reaffirms Targeted Advertising Is an Abstract Concept – On NationalLawReview.com, three Finnegan attorneys report on a recent determination by the Federal Circuit that certain claims were directed to an abstract idea of targeted advertising.

Here’s the latest.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions in patent infringement cases, along with four Rule 36 summary affirmances of appeals of judgments of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions of the opinions and a list of the summary affirmances.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a veterans case and a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. The court also issued three Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a list of the Rule 36 judgments.