FedCircuitBlog

As we’ve been reporting, three cases being argued at the Federal Circuit in February attracted amicus briefs. The third of these cases is Bee v. United States. In this case, William Bee appeals the denial of his request to have his military records reflect medical retirement rather than voluntary separation. This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. One of the opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the other comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. One of the orders grants a motion for summary affirmance; the other is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the first order and a link to the dismissal.

Last month, the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Lesko v. United States, an en banc case addressing federal employment law. In it, the Federal Circuit reviewed a federal employee’s argument that a writing requirement for overtime approval was not a valid exercise of the Office of Personnel Management’s rulemaking authority. In an opinion authored by Chief Judge Moore, the en banc court concluded that the writing requirement was a valid exercise of OPM’s rulemaking authority. Judge Stoll and three other judges dissented. This is our opinion summary.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, there has been no new activity at the Supreme Court in the two pending cases decided by the Federal Circuit. As for petitions, new petitions were filed in a takings case, a case addressing sanctions, and a pro se case. The Supreme Court also denied petitions in a veterans case, a case addressing the Quiet Title Act, and four pro se cases. Here are the details.

As we reported earlier this week, three cases being argued at the Federal Circuit in February attracted amicus briefs. One of these cases is Ligado Networks LLC v. United States, a takings case. In it, the United States appeals a decision of the Court of Federal Claims, arguing it erred by exercising jurisdiction over the case and treating a license from the Federal Communications Commission as property under the takings clause. This is our argument preview.

Three cases being argued at the Federal Circuit in February attracted amicus briefs. One of those cases is Doughtery Electric, Inc. v. United States, a tax case. In it, Dougherty Electric appeals the dismissal by the Court of Federal Claims of a refund suit for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions and one nonprecedential order. Two of the opinions come in patent cases, one appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and one appealed from a district court. The third opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims. The fourth opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The order transfers an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the order.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, one nonprecedential opinion, and four nonprecedential orders. One of the precedential opinions comes in a patent infringement case; the other precedential opinion comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The nonprecedential opinion comes in another appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One of the nonprecedential orders denies a petition for a writ of mandamus; another transfers a case. The other two dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and first two orders and links to dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released six nonprecedential opinions and seven nonprecedential orders. Four of the opinions come in patent cases, including two appeals of decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The fifth opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Court of Federal Claims, while the sixth opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Five of the orders dismiss appeals while two transfer cases. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders transferring cases and links to the dismissals.

On Friday, the Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc, a patent case decided by the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court will review the following questions:

1. “When a generic drug label fully carves out a patented use, are allegations that the generic drugmaker calls its product a ‘generic version’ and cites public information about the branded drug (e.g., sales) enough to plead induced infringement of the patented use?”
2. “Does a complaint state a claim for induced infringement of a patented method if it does not allege any instruction or other statement by the defendant that encourages, or even mentions, the patented use?”

Here is more information about the case.