FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. One of the opinions addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims. Another one of the opinions addresses an appeal from a summary judgment holding asserted patent claims ineligible for patenting. The remaining two opinions address appeals from judgments of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding certain claims unpatentable. The orders are both dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the orders.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal from two final written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board holding that claims had not been shown to be unpatentable. One nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal asking whether a district court erred in its claim construction in a patent case. The majority found that the district court did not err, while Judge Stark dissented. The other nonprecedential opinion affirms a lower court’s decision to dismiss a claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Finally, the order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include a petition for rehearing en banc filed in a patent case presenting questions related to patent eligibility, along with two denials of petitions in a patent case and a pro se case, respectively. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three opinions: a precedential opinion in a patent case addressing claim construction, a nonprecedential opinion in a pro se case addressing disability retirement pay, and a nonprecedential opinion in another pro se case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include a new petition in a pro se patent case and two new invitations for responses in patent cases raising questions related to obviousness and reduction to practice. The court also denied a petition in a patent case raising questions related to construction of alleged means-plus-function limitations. 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:

• an article discussing comments Judge Newman made in a recent interview regarding the ongoing dispute regarding her fitness to serve as a judge;
• an article covering statements made by Andrei Iancu, the former head of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and former Federal Circuit Judge Kathleen O’Malley, who both recently joined Sullivan & Cromwell; and
• a blog post about how a recent Federal Circuit decision “zeroes in on the motivation-to-combine analysis” and allegedly provides more clarity on what makes a proper obviousness analysis as a whole.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include two new petitions raising questions concerning actual reduction to practice and obviousness. The court also denied another petition raising a question related to obviousness. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case. In it, the court vacated and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board judgment that challenged claims were not unpatentable for obviousness. The court also released three nonprecedential orders, two dismissing appeals for untimeliness and one dismissing an appeal for failure to prosecute. Here is the introduction to the opinion, text from the dismissals for untimeliness, and a link to the dismissal for failure to prosecute.

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

• an article and a blog post discussing potential impact of the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in a trademark case decided by the Federal Circuit;
• a blog post highlighting “five tips for IPR practice” in light of the Federal Circuit’s ruling in a precedential case regarding inter partes review; and
• an article about the impact on attorney fee motions after the Federal Circuit’s decision in a patent case dealing with attorney fees and non-taxable costs under 35 U.S.C. § 285.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case addressing co-inventorship. The court also released four nonprecedential opinions, one in a patent case and three in pro se cases. Additionally, the court released five nonprecedential orders granting summary affirmance and an erratum. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the judgment, summary affirmances, and the erratum.