FedCircuitBlog

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

• an article highlighting seven Federal Circuit decisions from August, which “provided some helpful clarity on [obviousness-type double patenting], written description, indefiniteness, and the support needed for an exceptional case finding”;
• an article discussing how the Supreme Court has “denied yet another petition for writ of certiorari seeking clarity on the patent eligibility of claims covering improvements to computer technologies under 35 U.S.C. § 101”; and
• a blog post discussing a recent en banc petition the author says “highlights the tension between judicial efficiency and the court’s constitutional duty to independently review agency actions.”

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, the petitioners’ reply brief was filed in Bufkin v. McDonough, a veterans case concerning the benefit-of-the-doubt rule. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed in a patent case and a veterans case, and new waivers of the right to respond were filed in the same patent case and in a pro se case. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include four denials of petitions for rehearing en banc in patent cases concerning questions of patent eligibility, printed publications, and inter partes review. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Highlights include two new petitions for rehearing in patent cases presenting questions related to patent eligibility and claim construction. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, four nonprecedential opinions, and one nonprecedential order. One of the precedential opinions addresses an action brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The other precedential opinion, which was previously released as a nonprecedential opinion, addresses an appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Two of the nonprecedential opinions address appeals in patent cases—one from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and another from a district court. The third nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, ultimately finding a lack of jurisdiction. Finally, the fourth nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals. The order dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the order.