FedCircuitBlog

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three opinions: a precedential opinion in a patent case addressing claim construction, a nonprecedential opinion in a pro se case addressing disability retirement pay, and a nonprecedential opinion in another pro se case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Today, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a takings case. Late Thursday and this morning, the court also released five nonprecedential orders: four dismissing appeals and one erratum. Here is the introduction to the opinion and links to the dismissals and the erratum.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four opinions: a precedential opinion in a trade case addressing lack of jurisdiction, a precedential opinion in a veterans case addressing the Equal Access to Justice Act, another precedential opinion in a veterans case involving a dispute related to a transfer out of the Active Reserve Program and into the Individual Ready Reserve, and a precedential opinion in a veterans case addressing service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. Late yesterday and this morning, the court also released three nonprecedential orders, two dismissing appeals and one erratum. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals and the erratum.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, five amicus briefs were filed in Vidal v. Elster, a trademark case addressing the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. With respect to petition cases, a brief in opposition was filed in an employment case and the government waived its right to respond in a pro se case. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case addressing eligible subject matter. The court also released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the dismissal.

Here is this month’s update on activity in cases pending before panels of the Federal Circuit where the cases involve 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 three opinions, two in takings cases and one in a vaccine case, and a summary affirmance in a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. We also highlight reply brief in a patent case and oral arguments in two cases, a patent case and a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a trade case holding that a failure to provide access to redacted information was a violation of due process. Late yesterday and this morning, the court also released four nonprecedential orders, one granting a motion to voluntarily dismiss a cross-appeal, one dismissing an appeal as untimely, and two dismissing appeals. Here is the introduction to the opinion, text from the grant of the motion to voluntarily dismiss and the dismissal for untimeliness, and links to the other dismissals.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, a brief for the petitioner was filed in Vidal v. Elster, a trademark case raising a question related to the First Amendment. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed, one in a trade case and one in a pro se case. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two opinions. Specifically, the court released a precedential opinion in a veterans case addressing whether the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims properly determined that no remand to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals was required when denying a plaintiff’s claim. The court also released a nonprecedential opinion in a pro se case in which the Court of Federal Claims dismissed a plaintiff’s case for failure to state a claim. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Late last month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Jenkins v. United States, a takings case we have been following because it attracted an amicus brief. In this case, the Federal Circuit reviewed a district court’s conclusion that it did not have jurisdiction over a due process claim and its grant of the government’s motion for summary judgment on a takings claim related to the seizure and withholding of vehicles as the result of a drug conspiracy investigation. In an opinion authored by Judge Dyk and joined by Judges Lourie and Stark, the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part. In particular, the court held that “there is no police power exception that insulates the United States from takings liability for the period after seized property is no longer needed for criminal proceedings.” This is our opinion summary.