FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion comes in a patent case and addresses an appeal from a district court’s judgment that claims are invalid for lack of enablement. One of the two nonprecedential opinions stems from another patent case where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board found numerous claims unpatentable. The second nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The order dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the order.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. In a pending en banc veterans case, the court received two amicus briefs in support of the appellee, a veteran. The court also received two new petitions raising questions related to obviousness-based inherency of claims, the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, and the grounds for inter partes review proceedings. Finally, the court denied two petitions for rehearing en banc raising questions related to means-plus-function limitations. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received two new petitions raising questions related to transfers of cases and the ability of a Federal Circuit panel to nullify or render advisory an earlier judgment of the court. The court also received a response to a petition raising questions related to means-plus-function limitations. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. In a pending en banc veterans case, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs filed the government’s opening brief. As for pending petitions, the United States motioned for limited remand in a case raising questions related to the Appointments Clause; the court invited responses to two petitions raising questions related to means-plus-function limitations in patent claims; the court received a response to a petition raising questions related to the scope of usable prior art in inter partes review proceedings; and the court received an amicus brief supporting rehearing in one of the petitions raising questions related to means-plus-function limitations. 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 discussing an amicus brief filed by a group of intellectual property professors in support of an en banc petition in a patent case raising questions about claim construction;
• another article addressing a recent Federal Circuit decision that “clarifies infringement analysis”; and
• a third article detailing how the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition to review a Federal Circuit patent case.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received three new petitions raising questions related to ­­means-plus-function limitations and transfers. The court also denied five petitions for rehearing raising issues including the standard for granting a motion to seal court records, choice of law, estoppel arising from inter partes review, and claim construction. 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 discussing how the Federal Circuit recently gave “the Patent Trial and Appeal Board more freedom to identify its own unpatentability grounds that could block requests to amend a patent”;
• an article explaining how the Federal Circuit recently reversed and remanded “a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas that . . . claims were invalid as indefinite”;
• another article detailing how the “Federal Circuit is going to take a look at U.S. District Judge Alan Albright’s first decision invalidating a patent on eligibility grounds”; and
• yet another article assessing how “[t]he Arthrex appointments clause case is back before the [Federal Circuit] . . . calling into question not only Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions, but also hundreds of thousands of patents issued in the last 14 months.”

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Western District of Texas. The opinion reversed a finding of invalidity. The court also issued four nonprecedential opinions in patent cases appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, in the fourth case, Judge Prost wrote a concurring opinion to explain that had a patentability challenge been preserved it likely would have succeeded. Finally, the court issued three nonprecedential orders concerning, respectively, a dismissal for failure to prosecute and two voluntary dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.