FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, one new petition for en banc rehearing was filed in a patent case raising questions related to eligibility. One new response was filed in response to a petition raising a question related to unfair competition claims. Finally, the Federal Circuit denied two petitions for en banc rehearing that raised questions related to the written description requirement and venue, respectively. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and two errata. The opinion comes in an appeal of judgment of patent invalidity and a dismissal of breach-of-contract claims. It discusses when a claim’s preamble should be construed as limiting and addresses indefiniteness regarding spatial terms. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the errata.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, one new petition for en banc rehearing has been filed, raising a question related to the court’s ability to decide the adequacy of written description without deferring to a jury’s verdict; one new amicus brief was filed in support of a petition that raised a question related to venue; and, finally, the court denied two petitions for en banc rehearing one in a pro se case and the other that raised questions related to what qualifies as prior art and the Administrative Procedure Act. Here are the details.  

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case on appeal from a judgment of a district court and addresses patent law’s written description requirement. Both nonprecedential opinions come in appeals of decisions of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The order dismisses an appeal. Here are introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

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

• an article highlighting how the Federal Circuit recently “vacated a decision axing a[] . . . drug patent based on an argument not presented at trial and chastised the federal judge in Delaware who issued it”;
• an article discussing how the Federal Circuit “reverse[d], in whole or in part, the PTAB only about 20% of the time” in July;
• an article explaining that in a recent opinion, the Federal Circuit “affirmed a district court’s decision to grant a motion to dismiss a patent infringement case . . . due to patent ineligibility” of “image tagging patents”; and
• a blog post explaining that the “Federal Circuit is set to hear oral arguments in . . . a case that could significantly impact Orange Book patent listing (and delisting) practices under the Hatch-Waxman Act.”

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case and vacates a judgment of invalidity based on ineligibility. The nonprecedential order is a dismissal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the order.

This morning, the Federal Circuit did not release any opinions or orders on its website. Late Friday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders, each dismissing an appeal. Here are the links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion and a nonprecedential order. In the opinion, the court affirmed a judgment of the District of New Jersey in a patent case. In the order, the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the dismissal.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. In it, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that specific patent claims are unpatentable as obvious, the sale of a generic product would not induce infringement of the patents, and the sale of the generic product would not directly infringe other patents. Notably, Judge Newman dissented without opinion. The Federal Circuit also released two nonprecedential orders. One transfers an appeal to the Northern District of Georgia, and one denies a motion to dismiss and instead transfers an appeal to the Northern District of Ohio. Here is the introduction to the opinion and text from the orders.

This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order granting a joint motion to voluntarily dismiss an appeal. Here is the text from the order.