This morning the Federal Circuit released three precedential opinions, one in a patent case and two in employment cases. The precedential patent opinion addresses eligibility. The two precedential employment opinions address the interpretation and application of 38 U.S.C. § 714, which governs the removal, demotion, or suspension of employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs based on performance or alleged misconduct. Notably, Judge Newman dissented in one of these employment cases. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion in another patent case, and that opinion addresses claim construction. Here are the introductions to the opinions.
Opinions and Orders – August 4, 2021
This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a government contract case, a nonprecedential opinion affirming the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion, and a nonprecedential opinion in a veterans case. The court also issued three nonprecedential orders, including two orders in patent cases denying petitions for writs of mandamus seeking to order the Western District of Texas to transfer the underlying cases. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.
Update on Important Panel Activity
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 one disposition in a veterans law case, two oral argument recaps in a patent case and a veterans law case, four new patent cases, a patent case with new briefing, and four upcoming oral arguments in related Tucker Act cases. Here are the details.
Recent En Banc Activity
Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received two pro se petitions. Additionally, the court denied a petition concerning post-institution discovery rulings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board related to real-parties-in-interest disputes. Here are the details.
Recent En Banc Activity
Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. We are still waiting for the court to issue an opinion in Arellano v. McDonough, an en banc veterans case. As for pending petitions in patent cases, highlights include new petitions concerning Patent Trial and Appeal Board termination of inter partes review proceedings, reviewability of Board discovery rulings related to real-party-in-interest disputes, the utilization of expert witnesses in district court summary judgment proceedings, and standing before the Board. Here are the details.
Opinions & Orders – May 14, 2021
This morning the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions, one reviewing a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board and the other reviewing a decision of the Court of International Trade; two nonprecedential opinions, one reviewing another decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board and the other in a patent case; a nonprecedential order in Oracle America, Inc. v. Oracle LLC, on remand from the Supreme Court; and two Rule 36 summary affirmances. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the order, and a list of the summary affirmances.
Recent News on the Federal Circuit
- The Upshot of Google v. Oracle: An Absurd Ruling Will Lead to Absurd Results – This recent decision in copyright law may transform how copyrights in software are viewed and force copyright owners to be more secretive with their code.
- Federal Circuit Appears Unswayed by Patent Board Bias Attack – In oral argument, a majority of the panel seemed skeptical of New Vision’s argument of bias towards institution of IPRs by the PTAB.
- Justices Asked To Revisit “Life Issues” In Tinder’s IP Alice Win – The Supreme Court was asked to reconsider the Federal Circuit’s decision in NetSoc LLC v. Match Group LLC over concerns of the application of Alice to NetSoc’s patent.
Here’s the latest.
Recent News on the Federal Circuit
- Supreme Court Backs Google in Copyright Fight With Oracle – A 6-2 ruling ended the decade-long copyright dispute between Google and Oracle over Google’s use of Java programming code in its Android operating system.
- Apple Can’t Appeal Patent Board Rulings After Qualcomm Deal – In a precedential decision, the Federal Circuit ruled that a settlement agreement between Apple and Qualcomm bars Apple from challenging a PTAB decision that upheld two Qualcomm patents.
- Fitbit Wins Challenge to Health Technology Patent at Tribunal – On remand from the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appel Board ruled in favor of Fitbit and concluded that parts of a health-monitoring patent were invalid as obvious.
Here’s the latest.
Recent Supreme Court Activity
Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit.
- The Supreme Court rendered its decision in Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., the long-running software copyright case.
- Three amicus briefs were filed in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., a case that has been granted certiorari.
- The Court received three new petitions for writ of certiorari.
- One new brief in opposition was filed with the Court in response to the petition in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC.
- One new reply brief was filed with the Court in Ericsson Inc. v. TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited.
- One new amicus brief was filed with the Court in Common Ground Healthcare Cooperative v. United States by Anthem, Inc., Blue Cross of Idaho Health Service, Inc., Highmark Inc., L.A. Care Health Plan, and Molina Healthcare of California, Inc.
- Lastly, the Court denied the petitions in three cases.
Here are the details.
Opinion Summary – Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.
On April 5, 2021, the Supreme Court rendered its decision in Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., the long-running software copyright case. The Court sided with Google in a 6-2 opinion, holding that Google’s copying of the Java API code constituted fair use. Justice Breyer wrote the majority opinion for the Court and was joined by Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, Justice Kavanaugh, and Justice Gorsuch. Justice Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion and was joined by Justice Alito. Justice Barrett did not participate in the case. Here is a summary of the majority and dissenting opinions.