FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include new petitions filed in seven cases raising questions related to the Administrative Procedure Act, obviousness, patent eligibility, and the Appointments Clause, and the denial of four petitions raising questions related to collateral estoppel and inter partes review, the Appointments Clause, and obviousness. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include two responses to a petition raising questions related to prosecution history estoppel; one amicus brief in a case raising questions related to venue; and the denial of three petitions related to attorney’s fees, transfer, and Arthrex-related arguments. Here are the details.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights two articles discussing the Federal Circuit’s denial of en banc rehearing in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., a report on upcoming oral arguments set to be heard before the Federal Circuit over plutonium fines, and a preview of the oral argument to be heard before the Supreme Court in Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include new petitions filed in thirteen cases raising questions related to the Appointments Clause, venue, and claim construction and the denial of six petitions raising questions related to non-obviousness, anticipation, inherency, procedure, the statutory experimental use exception, and the Appointments Clause. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to pending cases, there was activity in only one case, the copyright case of Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. With respect to petitions cases, new petitions were filed in three patent cases, a response to a petition was filed in a Merit Systems Protection Board case, and two parties waived their rights to respond to petitions. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include four new petitions, three of which related to Arthrex and another related to obviousness, two responses to petitions raising questions related to the statutory experimental use exception and obviousness, and the denial of three petitions. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions in veterans cases, one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case, two nonprecedential opinions in Merit Systems Protection Board cases, one nonprecedential opinion in a veterans case, and two Rule 36 judgments. Continue reading for introductions to the opinions and a list of the Rule 36 judgments.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights an amicus brief filed by government in support of Oracle in its ongoing fight against Google at the Supreme Court and an article addressing how following a recent Federal Circuit decision patent owners may need to work harder to steer cases into desired venues.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights commentary on the importance of patent marking, an article describing a Federal Circuit decision that may allow federal contractors to purchase more foreign-made parts, and commentary on the Supreme Court’s pending copyright case, Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Highlights include thirty new amicus briefs in Google Inc. v. Oracle America, Inc., the denial of the application for a stay of the the Federal Circuit’s mandate in Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., three new petitions in a trade case and two patent cases, and a new amicus brief in support of a petition related to apportionment of patent damages. Here are the details.