This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, three nonprecedential opinions, and one Rule 36 summary affirmance. The precedential opinion, which drew a dissent from Judge Reyna, reverses and remands a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board cancelling the registration of a trademark. One nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from a Veteran’s Court decision, which is ultimately dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. Another nonprecedential opinion affirms a decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding a claim unpatentable as obvious. Finally, another nonprecedential opinion affirms a dismissal by the Court of Federal Claims. Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit also released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmance and dismissals.
Opinions & Orders – January 9, 2024
This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, four nonprecedential opinions, and two nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal involving two inter partes review proceedings, affirming decisions on claim construction and prior art challenges related to biomolecule identification. One nonprecedential opinion affirms Patent Trial and Appeal Board findings on obviousness and its decisions regarding evidence and discovery. Two nonprecedential opinions address appeals from the Merit Systems Protection Board, with one affirming the Board’s decision sustaining the removal of an employee and the other affirming the Board’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction. The final nonprecedential opinion affirms a district court’s conclusion that certain patent claims are ineligible, with a partial dissent related to claim construction and analysis of inventive concept. The nonprecedential orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.
Opinions & Orders – December 12, 2023
Today the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions, one in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and two in pro se cases. The court also released two nonprecedential orders, one granting a motion to withdraw a petition and one dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first order and a link to the second order.
Opinions & Orders – December 6, 2023
This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade and four nonprecedential opinions in pro se cases. The Federal Circuit also released four nonprecedential orders, three granting summary affirmances and one dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders.
Opinions & Orders – November 30, 2023
This morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential orders on its website. One transfers a case to the Western District of Texas, while the other four dismiss appeals. Here are links to the orders.
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, the Supreme Court heard arguments last week in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed with the Court in two patent cases raising questions related to the Federal Circuit’s practice of reversing agency decisions and patent eligibility. Two waivers of right to respond were filed, one in the patent case raising the question about reversing agency decisions and one in a pro se case. A brief in opposition was filed in a patent case addressing the ability to review determinations whether to institute inter partes review proceedings. An amicus brief was filed in a veterans case. And, finally, the Court denied a petition in a patent 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 providing an analysis of the oral arguments in Vidal v. Elster, which “involved a provision in the federal Lanham Act that directs the Patent and Trademark Office . . . to refuse to register any mark that identifies ‘a particular living individual’”;
- an article discussing “an opinion dealing largely with how much a patent owner can rely on information and belief-based allegations rather than facts”; and
- an article calling a district court opinion “a decision based on ignorance of patent law that must be overturned.”
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 how the “Federal Circuit . . . backed a pair of Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions that said Netflix failed to prove that two streaming patents were invalid”; and
- an article discussing how “Google waived its right to respond to a petition for writ of certiorari . . . filed by the inventors of a method for protecting computers from malware.”
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, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments next week in Vidal v. Elster, a trademark case. With respect to petitions, one new petition was filed with the Court in a patent case. Additionally, a waiver of right to respond was filed in the same patent case, and a reply brief was filed in support of a petition asking the Court to consider whether the deadline to file a petition to review a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board is jurisdictional. Here are the details.
Opinions & Orders – October 25, 2023
This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and four nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion rejects the argument the Patent Trial and Appeal Board failed to address several arguments made in two inter partes review proceedings. The court found no error in the how the Board understood the arguments at issue, but in a dissenting opinion Judge Dyk disagrees with the court. Two of the four orders are dismissals, while the other two transfer cases—one to a circuit court of appeals and another to a district court. Here is the introduction to the precedential opinion, selected text from the transfers, and links to the dismissals.