FedCircuitBlog

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal from the Merit System Protection Board and one Rule 36 judgment. This morning, the court released three precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, one nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal, and two Rule 36 judgments. Two of the precedential opinions came in cases appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. The third addressed a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Notably, while Judge Reyna concurred in the panel’s decision to affirm the Merit Systems Protection Board’s dismissal of the petitioner’s appeal, he wrote separately to express his view that the governing law represented an “unjust principle.” The two nonprecedential opinions come in patent cases decided by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments and dismissals.

Late yesterday the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning the court released four nonprecedential opinions, an additional nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal, and a Rule 36 summary affirmance. Of the opinions, one dismisses an appeal from the Court of Federal Claims for lack of jurisdiction, one affirms a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, one affirms a finding that a patent case appealed from a district court was an exceptional case for purposes of an award of attorney fees, and one affirms a dismissal of a case by the Court of Federal Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmance and dismissals.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal in a patent case. This morning, the court released three nonprecedential opinions. Two come in patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Eastern District of Louisiana, while one comes in an antidumping case appealed from the Court of International Trade. Here are the introductions to the opinions, along with a link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. The Court granted the petition for certiorari in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case raising a question related to GI Bill educational assistance. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed, one in a patent and one in a pro se case; a brief in opposition was filed in a patent case concerning inter partes review estoppel; and the Court denied petitions in two patent cases and five pro se cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. While no new petitions were filed with the Court, three waivers of the right to respond were filed in pro se cases; a reply brief was filed in a patent case; and the Court denied certiorari in a pro se and a veterans case. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. While no new petitions were filed with the Court, waivers of right to respond were filed in two pro se cases; a brief in opposition was filed in a patent case; reply briefs in support of petitions were filed in a patent case and in two veterans cases; amicus briefs were filed in two patent cases; and the Court denied certiorari in three patent cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report since our last update. With respect to petitions, most notably the Solicitor General filed an amicus brief expressing the view of the United States that the Court should grant review in two patent cases. No new petitions were filed, but the government waived its right to respond to two petitions and a party filed a supplemental brief in response to the Solicitor General’s amicus brief recommending the Court grant review in a patent case raising a question about so-called skinny labelling. 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 about a Supreme Court petition asking the Court “to weigh whether former Commissioner of Patents . . . had the power to reject a request for director review”;
• another article about another petition filed with the Supreme Court asking it “to review a Federal Circuit decision affirming the partial invalidation of a footwear stitching patent challenged by rival Adidas AG”; and
• a blog post commenting on “AI tools creating inventive output.”

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, on Monday the Court heard oral arguments in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC. With respect to petitions, four new petitions were filed with the Court in three patent cases and a pro se case. The Court also denied three petitions. Here are the details. 

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received a new petition raising questions related to the standard for claim construction. The court also denied a petition in a case raising a question related to burden of persuasion in inter partes review proceedings. Here are the details.