FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Since our last update, two new petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed raising questions related to damages and the Administrative Procedure Act. One new response was filed in a case raising a question related to appellate procedure. One new amicus brief was filed in a case raising questions related to enablement and written description. Finally, one petition was denied in a case raising a question related to inventorship. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, one petition for initial en banc hearing was granted in a case decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board raising questions related to the President’s Article II removal power. Three new petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed raising questions related to burden of proving unpatentability in inter partes review proceedings, obviousness, enablement, and written description. One new response brief was filed in a case raising questions related to the domestic industry requirement. Finally, one petition was denied in a case raising a question related to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Here are the details.

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

• an article discussing how an en banc petition “is drawing new attention to the question of when altered DNA becomes different enough from nature to be patented”;
• a blog post suggesting a recent Federal Circuit “opinion is a useful teaching vehicle on the patent/trade-secret interface”; and
• an article explaining how the “U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Artificial Intelligence Search Automated Pilot, or ASAP, program introduces earlier visibility into the prior art landscape by providing applicants with an automated search results notice prior to substantive examination.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, four nonprecedential opinions, three nonprecedential orders, and one errata. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal of a judgment in a patent infringement case. Three of the four nonprecedential opinions come in pro se appeals of decisions of the Court of Federal Claims; the fourth comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the three nonprecedential orders is a denial of permission to appeal; another is a denial of petitions for writs of mandamus directed toward the Patent and Trademark Office; the third is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first two orders and links to the dismissal and errata.