FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, yesterday the Supreme Court heard oral argument in a trademark case, Vidal v. Elster. With respect to petitions, two new petitions were filed with the Court in a trade case and a pro se case; an amicus brief was filed in a patent case addressing joinder in inter partes review proceedings. Finally, the Court denied petitions in a trade case and in two pro se cases. Here are the details.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion addresses a challenge to a claim construction order in a patent case. The nonprecedential opinion reviews a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board relating to alleged retaliatory action for whistleblowing, and the court’s judgment sparked a vigorous dissent by Judge Newman. Finally, the order is a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential orders. One order transfers an appeal to another circuit court of appeals; one order transfers an appeal to a district court; and one order denies a petition for a writ of mandamus. The two remaining orders are dismissals: one dismisses for lack of jurisdiction, and another grants a motion to voluntarily dismiss. Late Friday, the Federal Circuit also released another nonprecedential order that dismissed an appeal. Here are previews of selected orders and links to dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential orders. One order summarily affirmed a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims; one order denied a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to vacate an order transferring a patent case from the Northern District of Illinois to the Eastern District of Texas; and two orders dismissed appeals. Here is selected text from the summary affirmance and denial of the petition and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and six nonprecedential orders. The opinion addresses a consolidated appeal from two Patent Trial and Appeal Board final written decisions finding all challenged claims unpatentable. The majority affirmed both decisions, but in an opinion dissenting in part and concurring in part Judge Dyk asserted that the Board erred by not properly considering amendments made by the patentee during reexamination. One order transfers a case. The remaining five orders are dismissals. Here is the introduction to the opinion, selected text from the transfer, and links to the dismissals.

One case being argued in November at the Federal Circuit attracted an amicus brief. In this case, Boyer v. United States, the Federal Circuit will review a decision by the Court of Federal Claims granting the government’s motion for summary judgment and denying the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Both motions related to a pay discrimination claim under the Equal Pay Act, and the appeal relates primarily to the plaintiff’s argument that the trial court relied only on salary history to establish an affirmative defense. This is our argument preview.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released three nonprecedential opinions and two nonprecedential orders. One opinion addresses an appeal from the Court of International Trade. The other two opinions address appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board regarding patent claims which have been found unpatentable as obvious or anticipated. The nonprecedential orders are both dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released five nonprecedential opinions and four nonprecedential orders. Two opinions address appeals from inter partes reexaminations before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Each of those appeals had a corresponding related appeal, which was subsequently dismissed as moot in a corresponding nonprecedential opinion. Finally, the fifth nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal regarding veterans’ disability benefits. The first nonprecedential order summarily affirms a judgment, another transfers an appeal to a district court, and the final two are dismissals. Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit also released one nonprecedential order dismissing appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the orders, and links to the dismissals.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, four nonprecedential opinions, and three nonprecedential orders. The precedential opinion reverses a judgement of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board based on an erroneous claim construction. The first nonprecedential opinion addresses an appeal from a judgment in a takings case; the second resolves an appeal from a judgment of a district court, which construed certain claims in a means-plus-function format and held those claims as indefinite under that construction; the third addresses subject matter jurisdiction; the fourth comes in a pro se case. One of the orders denies a petition to transfer a case; the other two orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinions, selected text from the order denying the petition, and links to the 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 reply brief was filed in Rudisill v. McDonough, a veterans case. With respect to pending petitions, two new petitions were filed with the Court in a veterans case and in a pro se case, and a waiver of right to respond was filed in a patent case addressing both joinder in inter partes review proceedings and the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. Additionally, a brief in opposition was filed in a Tucker Act case and two reply briefs in support of petitions were filed in two different cases, one in a trade case presenting questions related to separation of powers and steel tariffs and one in a patent case addressing joint inventorship. Finally, the Court denied petitions in one patent case and two pro se cases. Here are the details.