FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board—challenging both the Board’s claim construction and asserting that the Board’s decision violates the Administrative Procedure Act. The two nonprecedential opinions address appeals from decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board, with one opinion sparking a dissent from Judge Reyna. The order grants a voluntary withdrawal of a petition for review. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the order.  

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article arguing the “full Federal Circuit should reject an ill-conceived request by major players in the repair parts industry” after yesterday’s arguments in a design patent case; and
• an article discussing how the Federal Circuit agreed “with a lower court’s conclusion that claims in an Eolas Technologies Inc. 1994 web patent weren’t actually valid, handing a win to Google, Amazon and Walmart.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and six nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. The nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One order transfers a case, and the others are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and transfer order and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, three nonprecedential opinions, and one Rule 36 summary affirmance.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 One nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from a Veteran’s Court decision, which is ultimately dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. Another nonprecedential opinion affirms a decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding a claim unpatentable as obvious. Finally, another nonprecedential opinion affirms a dismissal by the Court of Federal Claims. Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit also released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals.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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”