FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. As for granted petitions, a reply brief was filed in a pending en banc case concerning a district court’s responsibility to scrutinize a patentee’s reliance on supposedly comparable licenses. As for pending petitions, a pro se litigant filed a petition, a response was filed to a petition presenting a question related to waiver of alternative grounds for affirmance, and the court denied a petition presenting a question regarding vicarious liability for direct infringement. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Petitioners filed three new petitions, one presenting a question regarding waiver of alternative grounds for affirmance, one presenting a question regarding the burden of proving non-enablement in an inter partes review proceeding, and one presenting a question regarding injunctive relief pending a mandate. Additionally, the Federal Circuit issued an invitation for a response to a petition raising a question regarding the listing of patents in the Orange Book. Finally, a response was filed to the petition raising a question regarding injunctive relief pending a mandate. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, one in a copyright case and one in a trade case. The court also released three nonprecedential opinions, two in patent cases and one in a trade case. The court also released an erratum. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the erratum.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, Judge Stoll dissented from the majority’s decision to reverse a final written description that had declined to hold certain patent claims invalid as obvious. Here are the introductions to the majority and dissenting opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, a nonprecedential opinion, a summary affirmance under Federal Circuit Rule 36, and a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. The first precedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Western District of Virginia. The Federal Circuit reversed a jury verdict of no invalidity based on a prior offer for sale in the United States. The second precedential opinion comes in a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. The Federal Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgment that rejected illegal exaction claims. The nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Federal Circuit affirmed a holding invalidating claims for obviousness. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgment and dismissal.

This morning the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions, one nonprecedential order, and four Rule 36 judgments. The first nonprecedential opinion dismisses an appeal from an order of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The second and third nonprecedential opinions affirm decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The nonprecedential order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments and order.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, one Rule 36 judgment, and four nonprecedential orders. The first precedential opinion reverses a judgment of the District of Delaware in a patent case, while the second grants a petition for panel rehearing in a trade case appealed the Court of International Trade. The first nonprecedential opinion dismisses an appeal for lack of jurisdiction, while the second affirms a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. All of the nonprecedential orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgment and orders.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and four nonprecedential orders. The first precedential opinion reverses and remands a grant of summary judgment by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, while the second precedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The first nonprecedential opinion dismisses half of a consolidated appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board while affirming the other half, while the second nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. All of the orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential orders. One remands appeals to the Court of International Trade. One grants a petition for a writ of mandamus, while another denies a similar petition. Two are dismissals. Here are the links to the dismissals and selected text from the remaining orders.

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.”