FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, fourteen amicus briefs were filed in the only pending en banc case, which relates to the President’s Article II removal power. Also, two new response briefs were filed in response to petitions in patent cases raising questions related to damages, the written description requirement, and the enablement requirement. Here are the details.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article discussing how, “[o]n the eve of the 250th anniversary of Independence Day, in the nation’s capital, the Federal Circuit Center for Innovation and Law invited the public to the Justice Up Close, History All Around civics program to explore how law, innovation, science, and civic action have shaped the nation”;
• a blog post highlighting how USPTO Deputy Director Coke Morgan Stewart “announced this week that she will be leaving the Office as of this Friday”; and
• a blog post noting how “[n]early four dozen Democrats are calling for the reversal of a key Merit Systems Protection Board decision that they say could greatly expand presidential firing powers across the career federal workforce.”

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, three amicus briefs were filed in the only pending en banc case, which relates to the President’s Article II removal power. Three new petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed raising questions related to appellate procedure, the written description requirement, and claim construction. Finally, six petitions were denied in cases raising questions related to burden of proving unpatentability in inter partes review proceedings, obviousness, damages, appellate procedure, the domestic industry requirement, and objective indicia of nonobviousness. Here are the details. 

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the petitioner’s brief was filed in the only pending en banc case, which raises questions related to the President’s Article II powers and the Civil Service Reform Act. As for petitions, one new petition was filed raising questions related to appellate procedure and a motion to transfer. Finally, one petition was denied in a case raising several questions related to attorney’s fees. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, one amicus brief was filed in the only pending en banc case, which raises questions related to the President’s removal powers. The Federal Circuit also denied one petition for en banc review raising a question related the Hatch-Waxman Act. Here are the details. 

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• a blog post explaining that “the detailed description of . . . non-provisional patent applications must be perfect when filed, and that even if new information is discovered after filing, no changes can be made”;
• an article discussing how a recent Federal Circuit “ruling underscores how even small structural discrepancies in provisional patent applications can have significant consequences for priority claims and patent validity in pharmaceutical litigation”;
• a blog post highlighting how “Federal procedure has long used money bonds to price the risk that preliminary relief turns out wrong”; and
• an article suggesting a recent Supreme Court’s ruling “bolstered the Trump administration’s quest to fire immigration judges and other civil servants who have legal shields protecting them from at-will removal.”

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, one petition for initial en banc hearing was granted in a case decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board raising questions related to the President’s Article II removal power. Three new petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed raising questions related to burden of proving unpatentability in inter partes review proceedings, obviousness, enablement, and written description. One new response brief was filed in a case raising questions related to the domestic industry requirement. Finally, one petition was denied in a case raising a question related to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Here are the details.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article discussing how the “Federal Circuit on Wednesday agreed to conduct en banc review over the firing of two immigration judges”;
•  an article similarly outlining how the Federal Circuit “granted two former Justice Department employees’ request to expedite the appeal of their 2025 firings”;
• a blog post examining how, “in response to the May 12 opposition brief of . . . Chief Judge Kimberly Moore,” the Supreme Court denied Judge “Newman’s petition for certiorari”; and
• an article also discussing how the Supreme Court “declined . . . to hear a bid by the nation’s oldest federal judge, 98-year-old Pauline Newman, to overturn her suspension from duties.”

This morning the Federal Circuit granted a petition for en banc initial hearing in Jackler v. Department of Justice to review a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The question presented is: “Whether the Civil Service Reform Act’s procedural and substantive protections for federal workers conflict with the President’s Article II removal power.” Here is the full text of this morning’s order. We will report more on this case later.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential order and three nonprecedential opinions. The order grants a petition for initial hearing en banc in a case originally decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the opinions comes in a patent case appealed form the District of New Jersey, one comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and one comes in response to a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the order and opinions.