FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, with respect to granted petitions we have posted an opinion summary for a government contract case and an argument recap for a case addressing federal personnel law. With respect to pending petitions, two new petitions for en banc rehearing have been filed, one raising a question related to claim construction and one a question related to prosecution history estoppel. The Federal Circuit also denied petitions for en banc rehearing in two patent cases, one raising a question related to patent eligibility and one raising questions related to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52. Here are the details.

Late last month, the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in Percipient.AI, INC. v. United States. In this case, Percipient.ai appealed a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, which dismissed its bid protest for lack of standing. In an opinion authored by Judge Hughes and joined by Judges Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Chen, Cunningham, and Stark, the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court’s judgment. Notably, Judge Stoll filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Chief Judge Moore and Judges Lourie and Taranto. This is our opinion summary.

Last week the Federal Circuit held an en banc session to hear oral argument in Lesko v. United States, a federal employment law case. The case raises questions ultimately asking whether the Office of Personnel Management is authorized to adopt a requirement that any overtime pay be authorized in writing. This is our argument recap. 

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Since our last update, the en banc court heard oral argument in Lesko v. United States, an employment law case. Additionally, four new en banc petitions have been filed in patent cases raising questions related to the presumption of validity, eligibility, and claim construction. A new response was filed in a case concerning the appropriate test for design-patent infringement. Finally, the court denied petitions for en banc rehearing in two patent cases. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions, eleven nonprecedential orders, and a Rule 36 judgment. One of the opinions comes in a pro se case in an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board, while the other comes in an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Six of the orders deny petitions for writs of mandamus. Two of these denials come in patent cases. Another four orders dismiss appeals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and the orders other than the dismissals, along with links to the dismissals and Rule 36 judgment.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court granted a petition to review the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in the case challenging President Trump’s tariffs. With respect to pending petitions, since our last update new petitions were filed in a takings case and in two pro se cases; waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in two patent cases and three pro se cases; and an amicus brief was filed in a patent case. Here are the details.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion, two nonprecedential opinions, and a Rule 36 judgment. The precedential opinion comes in an appeal in a patent case decided by a district court. Both nonprecedential opinions come in pro se cases. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgment and yesterday’s dismissal.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions and two nonprecedential opinions. One of the precedential opinions comes in an appeal in a patent case decided by the Southern District of Texas, and the other is an appeal in a trade case decided by the Court of International Trade. Both nonprecedential opinions come in pro se cases appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and a Rule 36 judgment. Two of the opinions come in pro se cases, and the other is a revised opinion in a patent case. The original opinion issued in March. The revisions appear to add the identification of a patent claim that the original opinion did not identify. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions, two nonprecedential orders, and two Rule 36 judgments. All of the opinions are per curiam and come in pro se cases, two of which are trademark cases. The orders are both dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals and Rule 36 judgments.