FedCircuitBlog

Late Friday, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in an en banc case addressing federal employment law. Chief Judge Moore authored the majority opinion, which was joined by Judges Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Taranto, Chen, and Hughes. Notably, Judge Stoll authored a dissenting opinion that was joined by Judges Reyna, Cunningham, and Stark. This morning, the court released four nonprecedential opinions and three nonprecedential orders. One nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent infringement case appealed from the District of Delaware, another comes in a government contract case, another in an appeal of a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and the last one comes in a pro se challenge to a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Two of the orders transfer cases, while the third order denies a petition in a veterans case. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, four nonprecedential opinions, seven nonprecedential orders, and four Rule 36 judgments. One of the precedential opinions comes in an appeal from a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board and discusses the role of the doctrine of foreign equivalents in translating a mark in a foreign language. The other precedential opinion comes in an appeal from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in pro se appeals of decisions of the Court of Federal Claims, one of the other nonprecedential opinions comes in a pro se appeal in a patent infringement case, and the last nonprecedential opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Five of the orders deny petitions for writs of mandamus, while the other two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders denying petitions, along with links to dismissals and Rule 36 judgments.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, six nonprecedential opinions, two nonprecedential orders, and three Rule 36 judgments. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case covering trade secret misappropriation and correction of inventorship. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in patent cases, one in an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims, two in pro se appeals of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board, and one in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. One of the orders denies a petition for a writ of mandamus, and the other dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the order denying the petition, along with links to the other orders and the Rule 36 judgments.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three precedential opinions and five nonprecedential opinions. One of the precedential opinions comes in a patent infringement case appealed from the Western District of Texas, one comes in an appeal from the Court of International Trade, and the other comes in an appeal from a decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in appeals of decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, one comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Protections Board, and the other two come in pro se appeals of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and five nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. Four of the nonprecedential opinions come in pro se appeals, two of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board and two of decisions of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The fifth nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and five nonprecedential orders. The opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a dismissal of a complaint against the Patent and Trademark Office. One of the orders denies a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to transfer patent cases; one transfers a case to a federal district court; the third grants a motion to remand a patent case to a district court; and the last two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinion and first three orders and links to the dismissals.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and two nonprecedential opinions. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the nonprecedential opinions also comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, while the other comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, we posted a recap of the oral argument in President Trump’s case pending at the Court. As for pending petitions, new petitions were filed in a patent case, a case originating at the Merit Systems Protection Board, and a pro se case; a reply brief was filed in support of a petition in a takings case; an amicus brief was filed in a trademark case; and the Court denied four petitions raising questions in two patent cases and two pro se cases. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential opinions and three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. Three of the opinions come in patent cases. Judge Dyk dissented to one. The other two opinions come in pro se appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a judgment in a case involving claims of design and utility patent infringement. The nonprecedential opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the orders requires the parties to seek clarification of a final judgment in a patent case, while two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the first order and links to the dismissals.