FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. We have activity to report in both of the court’s two pending en banc veterans cases: a unanimous opinion in one and the filing of the appellant’s reply brief in the other. In patent cases with petitions for en banc rehearing, six new petitions have been filed raising questions related to patent eligibility, claim construction, due process, inducement of infringement in the context of Hatch-Waxman, and venue in the context of Hatch-Waxman. The court has also issued invitations for responses to petitions in two cases raising questions related to patent eligibility and intervention. And the court has denied three petitions raising questions related to obviousness, infringement and claim construction. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued six opinions and orders:

• a precedential opinion in a patent case affirming a holding of obviousness by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board,
• a nonprecedential opinion in another patent case affirming a holding of nonobviousness by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board,
• a nonprecedential opinion in a third patent case affirming a district court’s dismissal due to ineligibility, and
• three nonprecedential orders denying or dismissing petitions for writs of mandamus.

Here are the introductions to the opinions and excerpts from the orders.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. Three new petitions were filed, one in a patent case raising a question related to obviousness; another in a patent case raising a question related to anticipation; and another in a pro se case. As for previously-filed petitions, this week’s highlight is a response to a petition in a patent case raising questions related to claim construction and infringement in the context of compliance with an industry standard. Here are the details.