FedCircuitBlog

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, there is no new activity to report. As for still-pending petitions, three new petitions were filed: one in a patent case raising questions related to eligible subject matter and two filed by pro se petitioners. Waivers of right to respond were filed in two cases: the patent case already mentioned raising questions related to eligible subject matter and another patent case also concerning eligibility. Finally, a brief in opposition was filed in a patent case that raises a question regarding the appealability of a discretionary denial of inter partes review. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to the Supreme Court’s October 2021 term, the Court granted certiorari in a veterans case. The Court also requested the Solicitor General to file a brief expressing the views of the United States in a patent case. No new petitions were filed, but one amicus brief was submitted in support of a petition in a patent case and a waiver of right to respond was filed in a pro se case. Additionally, the Court denied four petitions: two in patent cases and two in pro se cases. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to the Supreme Court’s October 2021 term, since our last update the Court has not granted certiorari in any cases decided by the Federal Circuit. Three new petitions, however, have been filed with the Supreme Court: two in patent cases and one in a pro se case. Moreover, nine amicus briefs across three cases have been filed. Additionally, four waivers of right to respond, two briefs in opposition, and three replies have been filed. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received a new petition raising issues related to patent eligibility. The court also received three new responses to petitions filed in two cases addressing (1) the Patent and Trademark Office’s ability to deny inter partes review based on pending litigation concerning related patents and (2) patent eligibility. Additionally, the court received an amicus brief in the case addressing the denial of inter partes review based on pending litigation. Lastly, the court denied two petitions for rehearing en banc in cases concerning claim construction and the replacement of a primary prior art reference after institution by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit in patent cases. The court received three new petitions this week raising issues concerning the scope of appellate review, patent eligibility, and the extent of estoppel with respect to claim constructions. Additionally, the court invited responses in two cases addressing the court’s jurisdiction and the case addressing the extent of estoppel in claim constructions. Lastly, the court denied petitions in three cases raising questions related to patent eligibility, inventorship, and the evaluation of expert opinions. Here are the details.

Here is an update on recent en banc activity at the Federal Circuit. The court received a new petition in a patent case, which raised an issue related to the Patent and Trademark Office’s ability to deny inter partes review based on pending litigation concerning related patents. Here are the details.

This morning the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential order in a patent case granting a petition for panel rehearing to the extent that the panel withdrew and replaced its precedential opinion in the same case. The order indicates that the precedential opinion, also issued today, differs from the original opinion only to the extent that the panel added one additional sentence, which explains why summary judgment was inappropriate. The court also issued a nonprecedential opinion in another patent case. Here is text from the order and the introductions to the opinions.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case affirming a judgment of noninfringement. Additionally, the court issued two Rule 36 judgments. The introduction to the opinion and links to the Rule 36 judgments can be found here.

This morning, the Federal Circuit issued four nonprecedential opinions: one in a veterans case, a second in a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board, and a third in a case dismissed for a lack of jurisdiction by the Court of Federal Claims. The Federal Circuit also issued four Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments.

• Federal Circuit Judge Calls High Court IP Decisions “Inconsistent” – At a conference on Thursday, Judge Raymond Chen noted that the Supreme Court’s policy towards novelty in the patent-eligibility inquiry seemed to be at odds with the Court’s decisions.
• Intel Trial Will Stay in Waco as Federal Circuit Declines to Weigh in – Judge Alan Albright will be able to hear the case involving VLSI Technology and Intel in Waco in February after the Federal Circuit’s decision in In re Intel Corp.
• Iancu Leaves Pro-Patentee Legacy as USPTO Director – Andrei Iancu stepped down on Wednesday after three years of instituting policies that favored patentees and that clarified USPTO procedures.

Here’s the latest.