Here is this month’s 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 a new opinion issued in a patent case resolving a dispute related to claim construction, a new amicus brief in a patent case addressing discretionarily denials of petitions for inter partes review based on parallel district court litigation, a response brief in a patent case involving a dispute related to claim construction, and an intervenor brief filed by the Acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in a case involving an appeal and cross-appeal from an inter partes review proceeding. Finally, the court scheduled oral argument next month in two cases that attracted amicus briefs. Here are the details.
Opinions & Orders – June 25, 2025
This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions, two in patent cases, one appealed from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, and one appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals in one MSPB case and one patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.
Opinions & Orders – June 18, 2025
This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, one nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal, and one errata. In the precedential opinion, the court dismissed an appeal from the International Trade Commission for lack of jurisdiction. Both of the nonprecedential opinions were appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board following inter partes review proceedings. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissal and errata.
Opinions & Orders – June 6, 2025
Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a vaccine case, affirming-in-part and reversing-in-part a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. The Federal Circuit also released five nonprecedential opinions, two in appeals from the Merit Systems Protection Board, one in an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, one from the Court of Federal Claims, and one from the Armed Service Board of Contract Appeals. The Federal Circuit also released four nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.
Opinions & Orders – June 4, 2025
This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and two Rule 36 summary affirmances. Of the precedential opinions, one of the cases was a patent case appealed from a district court and the other was a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. Both of the nonprecedential opinions come in cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmances.
Recent En Banc Activity
Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, the en banc court issued an order granting an immediate administrative stay of judgments and permanent injunctions. As for the two pending en banc cases, the court will hear oral argument next week in one, a government contract case, and the court received an amicus brief in the other, which raises questions related to statutory interpretation and agency deference. As for pending petitions, since our last update the court received five new petitions, three in patent cases, one in a case raising questions related to statutory interpretation, and one in a pro se case. In addition, a response has been filed to a petition in a patent case raising a question related to collateral estoppel. The court also denied two petitions for en banc rehearing in a patent case and a pro se case. Here are the details.
Opinion Summary – Ecofactor, Inc. v. Google LLC
In late May, the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in Ecofactor, Inc. v. Google LLC. In this case, Google appealed a judgment decided of the Western District of Texas, which denied its motion for a new trial on damages. In an opinion authored by Chief Judge Moore and joined by Judges Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and remanded the case for a new trial on damages. The Federal Circuit additionally reinstated the panel opinion as to issues other than damages. This is our opinion summary.
Recent En Banc Activity
Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, the court issued an en banc opinion in a patent case. Additionally, two new en banc petitions were filed. The first raises claim construction questions and the second was filed pro se. The Federal Circuit also invited a response to a petition raising a question related to collateral estoppel, and a new response was filed in opposition to an en banc brief. One amicus brief was also filed with the Federal Circuit. Lastly, the court recently denied five petitions for en banc rehearing. Here are the details.
Opinions & Orders – May 22, 2025
Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in an en banc case appealed from the Western District of Texas. Notably, Judges Reyna and Stark concurred in part and dissented in part. Today, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trademark case. The court also released three nonprecedential opinions affirming judgments, the first in a veterans case, the second in a patent case, and the third in an appeal from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. The Federal Circuit also released one nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.
Opinions & Orders – May 2, 2025
This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, as well as a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Virginia. In the patent case, the Federal Circuit affirms holdings that claims are invalid because they are ineligible for patenting. Here are the introductions to the opinions.