FedCircuitBlog

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article arguing President Trump’s new replacement tariffs “almost certainly violate the law”;
• an article discussing how the Federal Circuit rejected “Tesla Inc.’s constitutional challenge to a Trump administration rule that makes it harder to contest the validity of patents at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office”;
• a blog post addressing a recent Federal Circuit decision holding that “genetically engineered cultured host cells containing recombinant nucleic acid molecules are not directed to a natural phenomenon, and therefore are patent-eligible subject matter”; and
• an article reporting how the Federal Circuit recently “held unlawful the U.S. International Trade Commission’s practice of automatically treating as confidential the questionnaire responses it receives in injury investigations.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and two nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, it includes an opinion concurring-in-part and dissenting-in-part filed by Judge Dyk. The other nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. One of the orders rules on a petition for review of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board; the other rules on a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Patent and Trademark Office to to vacate non-institution decisions and reconsider petitions for inter partes review without relying on time-to-trial as a factor. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and two nonprecedential orders. The opinion comes in an appeal from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which found claims not unpatentable. Notably, Judge Dyk dissented. One of the orders denies a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to order the Patent and Trademark Office to reconsider a petition for inter partes review without relying on consideration of “settled expectations.” The other order is a dismissal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and the order denying the petition along with a link to the dismissal.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing a patent case appealed from the Patent and Trademark Office. This morning, the Federal Circuit issued five nonprecedential opinions. Two arose from appeals of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board, one from a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, one from a decision of the Court of Federal Claims, and one from a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The Federal Circuit also released two Rule 36 judgments and two more dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments and dismissals.

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 bid by Apple Inc, Google Inc, Intel Corp and others to revive their challenge to a U.S. Patent and Trademark Office policy that made it harder to contest the validity of patents issued by the agency”;
• another article about the Federal Circuit’s skepticism about “allegations that [Facebook’s] news feed infringed on Usability Sciences’ 2014 patent”; and
• a blog post about the Federal Circuit denying a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Amazon.com, Inc.