FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, one precedential order, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal from judgments arising out of a bench trial in the Western District of Louisiana in a patent case.  The nonprecedential opinion affirms a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding certain claims unpatentable for obviousness. The precedential order, which attracted amicus attention and a dissent joined by four judges, denies a sua sponte request for rehearing en banc. Two of the orders transfer cases, and one dismisses a set of appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions, selected text from the precedential order and transfers, and link to the dismissal.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and five Rule 36 summary affirmances. The nonprecedential opinion addresses a pro se appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Late Friday, the Federal Circuit also released one nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the dismissal and summary affirmances.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, one dismissal, and two Rule 36 summary affirmances. The precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgement of the United States Court of International Trade. One of the nonprecedential opinions addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board, while the other addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissal and summary affirmances.

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

• an article about how the “Federal Circuit . . . backed a pair of Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions that said Netflix failed to prove that two streaming patents were invalid”; and
• an article discussing how “Google waived its right to respond to a petition for writ of certiorari . . . filed by the inventors of a method for protecting computers from malware.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and four nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion rejects the argument the Patent Trial and Appeal Board failed to address several arguments made in two inter partes review proceedings. The court found no error in the how the Board understood the arguments at issue, but in a dissenting opinion Judge Dyk disagrees with the court. Two of the four orders are dismissals, while the other two transfer cases—one to a circuit court of appeals and another to a district court. Here is the introduction to the precedential opinion, selected text from the transfers, and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, one nonprecedential opinion, and one order dismissing an appeal. One precedential opinion addresses an appeal from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding claims unpatentable as obvious. This first opinion ultimately concludes that the decision violated the Administrative Procedure Act. The other precedential opinion also addresses an appeal of a decision of the PTAB, this one concluding that the PTAB abused its discretion in determining that a party failed to identify a field of endeavor and thus failed to establish analogous art for purposes of an obviousness analysis. Finally, the nonprecedential opinion affirms a dismissal by the United States Court of Federal Claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions in patent cases addressing, respectively, claim construction and definiteness. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions. One comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, one in a patent case appealed from the International Trade Commission, and one in an employment case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions and an erratum. In the first opinion, the court dismissed an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. In the second, the court affirmed a judgment of the Patent and Trial Appeal Board. In the third, the court reversed a judgment of no invalidity in a patent case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. In the fourth, the Federal Circuit affirmed a judgment in a pro se case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the erratum.

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

• an article about the Federal Circuit deciding the Patent Trial and Appeal Board “must take a second look at a video-streaming technology patent challenged by Netflix Inc. and Hulu LLC”;
• a blog post about the potential effects of an upcoming Supreme Court case on patents; and
• another article about a Federal Circuit decision affirming claim construction rulings by the Eastern District of Texas.