FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and three nonprecedential orders. The opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the International Trade Commission in a patent case. One of the three orders transfers an appeal; another grants a motion for an extension of time to file response; and the third denies a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Patent and Trademark Office to vacate a decision not to institute an inter partes review proceeding. Here are the introductions to the opinion and orders.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, two petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed with the Federal Circuit in patent cases, raising questions related to judicial estoppel, appellate procedure, and obviousness. The Federal Circuit also denied a petition for en banc rehearing in a pro se case. Here are the details.

Here is an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases have attracted 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 three recent opinions, four recent orders, and one new case. Here are the details.

Last month, the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, a trademark case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed the International Trade Commission’s finding of no violation as to one set of parties (the “Active Respondents”) and the Commission’s entry of a limited exclusion order against another set of parties (the “Defaulting Respondents”). In an opinion authored by Judge Stoll, a panel of the court consisting of Judges Lourie, Stoll, and Chen dismissed the appeal in part and affirmed the Commission’s decision in part. This is our opinion summary.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. One precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in a patent infringement case decided by a district court, and the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. Two of the orders dismiss appeals. The remaining order is a sue sponte order recalling a mandate for the limited purpose of correcting a misstatement in the opinion. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the order recalling the mandate, along with links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and five nonprecedential orders. The first opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the International Trade Commission in a patent case; the second opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; and the third opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. One of the orders grants a motion to permit an appearance for the purpose of withdrawing an appeal; the other four dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions the opinions and links to the orders.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, a nonprecedential order, and two Rule 36 judgments. One of the precedential opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of International Trade; the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the International Trade Commission. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board; the other comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. The order transfers a case to the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the order and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit Court heard oral argument in Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, a trademark case we have been watching because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, Crocs appeals the International Trade Commission’s denial of a general exclusion order. This is our argument recap. 

Last week, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in two consolidated cases styled In re United States. In the first case, the United States, on behalf of the International Trade Commission, appeals a judgment of the Court of International Trade, arguing it abused its discretion in denying the parties’ joint motion to redact information submitted to the Commission. In the second case, the International Trade Commission petitions the Federal Circuit to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Court of International Trade to retain the Commission’s designation of information as business proprietary information. Judges Dyk, Taranto, and Chen heard the argument. This is our argument recap.

Here is an 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 two new opinions, four recent oral arguments, and five upcoming oral arguments. Here are the details.