FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion, ten nonprecedential orders, and one Rule 36 judgment. The opinion affirms a grant of a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in a pro se case. One of the orders summarily affirms a final judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, while four of the orders transfer cases. Five of the orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinion, summary affirmance, and transfers, as well as links to the dismissals and Rule 36 judgment.

Last week, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in ATS Ford Drive Investment, LLC v. United States, a takings case that attracted an amicus brief. In it, the Federal Circuit is reviewing a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, which granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of the government. Judges Lourie, Stoll, and Cunningham heard the argument. This is our argument recap.

Yesterday afternoon the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential orders, which were all dismissals. This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. The first opinion affirms a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction by the Court of Federal Claims, while the second opinion affirms a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The first order transfers a case to the District of Arizona, while the second order is another dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and transfer as well as links to the dismissals.

In late September the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in ACLR, LLR v. US, a government contract case that we have been tracking because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a grant of summary judgment by the Court of Federal Claims on ACLR’s claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and recovery of certain termination-for-convenience damages. The Court of Federal Claims granted summary judgment in favor of the government based on ACLR’s purported failure to keep records sufficient to establish costs it was seeking to recover as damages. The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment in an opinion authored by Judge Stark that was joined by Judge Prost and Judge Hughes. This is our opinion summary.

This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and an erratum. The first nonprecedential opinion comes in a case decided by the Court of Federal Claims involving a challenge to a decision of the Board for Correction of Naval Records. The second nonprecedential opinion comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the erratum.

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit. The court will convene 13 panels to hear 63 cases. Of the 63 cases, the court will hear oral argument in 41 cases. The Federal Circuit provides access to live audio of these arguments via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. This month, three cases scheduled for oral argument attracted amicus briefs. Here’s what you need to know about these three cases.

Today the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and one nonprecedential order. One of the opinions comes in a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, which dismissed various claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and granted judgment on the record with respect to other claims. The second and third opinions come in related patent infringement cases. The nonprecedential order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, the petitioner filed his reply brief in Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, a case originating at the Merit Systems Protection Board. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed. One comes in a patent case raising questions related to summary judgment and Rule 36 summary affirmances. The other comes in a pro se case. Finally, one new reply in support of a petition was filed in another patent case raising a question related to the abstract idea exception to patent eligibility. Here are the details.

As we have highlighted, three cases scheduled to be argued in November at the Federal Circuit attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is ATS Ford Drive Investment, LLC v. United States, a case involving a taking claim. In this case, ATS Ford Drive Investment appeals a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, which granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of the government. This is our argument preview.

Here is an update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the case involves at least one amicus brief. We keep track of these cases in the “Other Cases” section of our blog. Today with respect to these cases we highlight one new opinion in a case raising a question related to se advertising counterclaims under the Lanham Act; two new cases, one a takings case and another a patent case; and new briefing in a case raising questions related to whether a district court erred in denying a motion to intervene and to unseal court records. Here are the details.