FedCircuitBlog

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

• an article and a blog post providing information on the recently released letter and order regarding the ongoing investigation into Judge Newman’s fitness to serve as a judge; and
• a blog post discussing whether obviousness is a question of law or fact.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include a new petition presenting a question related to the standard of review of obviousness determinations and a response brief addressing what constitutes a final judgment for purposes of appellate jurisdiction. 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 the recent Federal Circuit decision that “vacated a $576 million judgment against Apple”; and
• a blog post about the Solicitor General’s recent “amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court advising it to grant Teva Pharmaceuticals’ petition for writ of certiorari.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and two nonprecedential opinions. In the first precedential opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. In the second precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed a judgment of the International Trade Commission. In the first nonprecedential opinion, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a judgment of the Eastern District of Texas in a patent case with instructions to dismiss the case as moot. In the second nonprecedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed another judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential orders. In the first order, the court granted a petition for permission to appeal an order of the United States Court of Federal Claims. In the second order, the Federal Circuit denied a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Western District of Texas to transfer a case. In the third order, the Federal Circuit denied a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to terminate an inter partes review proceeding. Here are the introductions to the orders.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions. The first comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Notably, Judge Newman dissented. The second comes in a patent case appealed from the Central District of California. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the District of Utah. Finally, the court released three nonprecedential orders. One denies a petition to transfer a case to the Northern District of California; one dismisses an appeal for lack of jurisdiction and denies petitions for writs of mandamus; and one denies a petition and cross-petition to appeal from an order of the Northern District of California. Here are the introductions to the opinions and text from the orders.

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 written description requirement. The court also received a new response to a different petition also raising a question related to the written description requirement. In addition, the court denied a petition for hearing en banc raising a question related to the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction to hear appeals from denials of petitions for inter partes review. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. In the only pending en banc case, a veterans case, the appellant filed his en banc reply brief and the court scheduled the oral argument to occur in February. We will post an argument preview prior to the oral argument. As for petitions for rehearing en banc in patent cases, the court received two new petitions raising questions relating to the standard for enhanced damages and the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction. The court also received responses to two petitions raising questions related to the inducement doctrine’s interaction with the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and the notice required to collect damages for infringement. Finally, the court denied three petitions raising questions related to the interpretation of a forum selection clause, a writ of mandamus, and comparable licenses and royalty calculations, and another petition in a pro se case. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case, affirming the District of New Jersey’s judgment that the plaintiff did not establish proper venue under the patent venue statute with respect to the named domestic defendants and did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted with respect to the named foreign defendant. The Federal Circuit also released five Rule 36 judgments. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a list of the Rule 36 judgments.