FedCircuitBlog

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released two precedential opinions, four nonprecedential opinions, and a Rule 36 judgment. One of the precedential opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Of the nonprecedential opinions, one comes in appeals of a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board; another comes in an appeal of a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board; another comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims; and the fourth comes in the form of a pro se petition for review of an arbitrator’s decision. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the judgment and yesterday’s dismissal.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and five nonprecedential orders. The first opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the International Trade Commission in a patent case; the second opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; and the third opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. One of the orders grants a motion to permit an appearance for the purpose of withdrawing an appeal; the other four dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions the opinions and links to the orders.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, there has been no new activity at the Supreme Court in the only pending case decided by the Federal Circuit. As for petitions, there has been a lot of activity:

• eight new petitions were filed, one in a patent case and seven in pro se cases;
• nine waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in patent cases, a veterans case, an MSPB case, a government contracts case, and pro se cases;
• fourt briefs in opposition were filed in a Quiet Title Act case, a veterans case, and government contracts case;
• three reply briefs in support of petitions were filed in the same Quiet Title Act case, a trademark case, and the same government contracts case;
• sixteen amicus briefs have been filed two patent cases, a veterans case, and two takings cases;
• supplemental briefs were filed in a patent case and a pro se case; and
• the Supreme Court denied petitions in two patent cases, a takings case, a case addressing jurisdiction and a pro se case.

Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released six nonprecedential opinions and one nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Two of the opinions come in patent cases; two come in appeals of decisions of the Court of Federal Claims, one of which involves a pro se party; one comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board; and one comes in an appeal of a decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released three nonprecedential opinions and a Rule 36 judgment. One of the opinions comes in a patent infringement case. The other two come in appeals of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board, one of which involves a pro se party. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissal and judgment.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals and an errata. Here are links to the orders and the errata.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals. This morning, the court released two nonprecedential opinions, four nonprecedential orders, and an errata. One of the two opinions comes in a patent infringement case; the other comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. One of the four orders transfers a matter; another dismisses a petition for a writ of mandamus; and the other two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the first order and links to the dismissals and the errata.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and four nonprecedential orders. The opinion comes in a pro se appeal from a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. Notably, Judge Cunningham concurred only in the result. One of the orders affirms a dismissal of a complaint by the Court of Federal Claims; another grants a motion to transfer an appeal; the final two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinion and first two orders, along with links to the dismissals.

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.