FedCircuitBlog

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

• an article predicting how “[t]wo proposed laws affecting patents may come up for vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee after the election”;
• an article discussing the Federal Circuit’s opinions in patent cases in September;
• a blog post highlighting a recent Federal Circuit decision that vacated a “denial of an anti-suit injunction in a major FRAND licensing dispute”; and
• an article reporting how a “federal judge in Minnesota recused himself from a patent case more than five years into proceedings after the Federal Circuit reversed his interpretation of a key patent term.”

Happy Halloween! Yesterday afternoon, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders, both of which were dismissals. This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions. Two come in patent cases, while the third comes in a veterans case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, and four nonprecedential orders. The first precedential opinion comes in a government contract case, while the second comes in a patent case. The first nonprecedential opinion comes in a tax case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, while the second comes in an appeal from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. Two of the nonprecedential orders grant motions to transfer, a third denies a petition for a writ of mandamus, and the fourth is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and all of the orders other than the dismissal, which we link.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders.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This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and one nonprecedential order.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.