FedCircuitBlog

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 issued its opinion in George v. McDonough. With respect to petition cases, four new petitions were filed with the Court; a waiver of right to respond was filed in a veterans case brought by a pro se petitioner; three amicus brief were filed in another veterans case raising a question about the standard of proof for disability claims; and the Court denied two petitions, one in a patent case and one in a pro se case. Notably, in the patent case the petitioner presented the same two questions presented to the Court in American Axle & Mfg, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC. Here are the details.

The Supreme Court issued its opinion today in George v. McDonough. In a six to three decision, the Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s ruling, finding that “[t]he invalidation of a VA regulation after a veteran’s benefits decision becomes final cannot support a claim for collateral relief based on clear and unmistakable error.” Justice Barrett authored the Court’s majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Alito, Kagan, and Kavanaugh. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, as did Justice Gorsuch, who was joined by Justice Breyer and in part by Justice Sotomayor. Here is our summary of the Court’s opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the second comes in another patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Virginia. Finally, the Federal Circuit released two Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board; the second comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the third comes in a trademark case appealed from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board; and the fourth comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Michigan. Late yesterday and this morning the Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential order dismissing a case and three Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the order, and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade. Notably, Judge Chen filed an opinion with additional views expressing concern that the majority decided a prior case and the case at issue incorrectly under Supreme Court precedent. The Federal Circuit also released three nonprecedential opinions in veterans cases appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Finally, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order, a Rule 36 judgment, and an erratum. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the order, and links to the Rule 36 judgment and erratum.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board; the second comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The Federal Circuit also released two Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions. The first comes in a trademark case appealed from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board; the second comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Late yesterday and this morning the Federal Circuit also released three nonprecedential orders. One dismisses an appeal for lack of jurisdiction, subject to reinstatement; one dismisses an appeal for failure to prosecute; and one grants a voluntary motion to dismiss. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. In a pending en banc veterans case, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs filed the government’s opening brief. As for pending petitions, the United States motioned for limited remand in a case raising questions related to the Appointments Clause; the court invited responses to two petitions raising questions related to means-plus-function limitations in patent claims; the court received a response to a petition raising questions related to the scope of usable prior art in inter partes review proceedings; and the court received an amicus brief supporting rehearing in one of the petitions raising questions related to means-plus-function limitations. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders. One grants a motion to remand to an arbitrator; one dismisses an appeal; and one grants a motion to remand to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here is text from 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, six amicus briefs were filed in a veterans case in support of the petitioner. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed in a patent case concerning alleged fraud on the court and a pro se veteran’s case; a waiver of a right to respond was filed in the patent case; another waiver of a right to respond was filed in a veterans case; a brief in opposition was filed in a patent case concerning eligibility; and a petitioner filed a reply in support of a petition in another patent case raising questions about eligibility. Here are the details.