Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. This week’s highlight is the denial of a petition for rehearing en banc in a patent case presenting three questions related to the non-obviousness requirement.
Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include the filing of an opening en banc brief in an en banc case reconsidering the longstanding test governing design patent obviousness and the denial of a petition raising questions related to obviousness.
Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include a new petition in a pro se patent case and two new invitations for responses in patent cases raising questions related to obviousness and reduction to practice. The court also denied a petition in a patent case raising questions related to construction of alleged means-plus-function limitations. Here are the details.
Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. Highlights include a new petition presenting questions related to obviousness, a response brief addressing standards governing reissue, and denials of two petitions presenting questions related to definiteness and claim construction. Here are the details.
This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, one in a government contract case and one in a tax case. The court also released three nonprecedential opinions, all in patent cases. The court also released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a link to the dismissal.
Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an article about the Federal Circuit allowing Chief U.S. Judge Colm Connolly of the District of Delaware to “inquire into compliance with his standing orders into ownership transparency” in patent cases;
- another article about the Federal Circuit denying a motion to enjoin a litigant “from commercially marketing generic versions of [a] sleep disorder drug”; and
- a third article about a Federal Circuit decision regarding whether under a pretrial discovery order in a patent case is appealable under the collateral order doctrine.
Breaking News — Supreme Court Denies Review in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings, LLC
This morning, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC, an important patent eligibility case decided by the Federal Circuit in 2019. In this case, the petitioner requested the Supreme Court grant review to reconsider the appropriate standard for determining patent eligibility and to determine whether eligibility is a question of law or fact. The Solicitor General previously recommended the Court grant review to reconsider the first question presented, addressing the appropriate standard for determining eligibility. But today the Court denied the petition.
Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. As for merits cases, highlights include an oral argument and a slew of amicus briefs, respectively, in two cases. As for petitions, only one new petition was filed, and just a handful of response and reply briefs were filed. The Supreme Court, however, denied petitions in a large number of cases, including most notably in Athena, Hikma, and HP, as we previously discussed. Here are the details.
This morning the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari in Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC, one of the most important patent cases in recent memory. In that case, the petitioner pleaded with the Court to revisit the doctrine of patent eligibility given the uncertainty and incorrect results generated by the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., particularly in the area of life sciences technologies. Notably, the Court also denied review in two other cases raising issues related to patent eligibility, Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. and HP Inc. v. Berkheimer. We have the details.