FedCircuitBlog

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 changing burdens in computer software copyrightability;
• a blog post about potential ethical dilemmas artificial intelligence presents to patent attorneys; and
• an article about a petition for certiorari that “outlined a confusing procedural history that arguably mirrors the broader confusion over Section 101.”

Last month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in SAS Institute, Inc. v. World Programming Limited, a copyright case we have been following because it attracted several amicus briefs. In this case, SAS Institute appealed a decision by the Eastern District of Texas to dismiss claims of copyright infringement by World Programming. SAS contended the district court incorrectly analyzed copyrightability and incorrectly excluded witness testimony. In an opinion authored by Judge Reyna and joined by Judge Wallach, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding. Notably, Judge Newman dissented. This is our opinion summary

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• a blog post discussing a recent Federal Circuit opinion addressing copyright law; and
• another blog post identifying “many improvements to [the] drafting and prosecuting of patent applications [that] can be made by both the applicants and examiners to provide more certainty to the validity of issued patents.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, two nonprecedential orders, and three Rule 36 judgments. In the precedential opinions, the court respectively affirmed a judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and affirmed a judgment in a copyright case appealed from the Eastern District of Texas. Notably, Judge Newman dissented in the copyright case. In the nonprecedential opinions, the Federal Circuit respectively affirmed a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction by the Court of Federal Claims and affirmed a judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. In the nonprecedential orders, the Federal Circuit respectively transferred an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and dismissed an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions, text from the orders, and links to the dismissal and Rule 36 judgments.

A Federal Circuit panel heard oral argument earlier this month in SAS Institute Inc. v. World Programming Ltd., a copyright case originally filed in the Eastern District of Texas. We have been following this case because it attracted ten amicus briefs, six in support of SAS and four in support of WPL. In this case, SAS appeals a decision by the district court dismissing its claim of copyright infringement by WPL. SAS contends the district court incorrectly analyzed the copyrightability of a computer program and improperly excluded relevant witness testimony. Judges Newman, Reyna, and Wallach heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:

• an article detailing how “[t]hree judges of the Federal Circuit wrestled at oral argument with whether a trial court properly prevented publication of a patent application . . .”;
• another article discussing the Federal Circuit’s affirmation of a “district court’s finding that a patent claim does not fail the written description requirement merely because the specification fails to explicitly state a negative claim limitation”;
• another article detailing how the Federal Circuit has considered whether “USPTO reexam estoppel orders [are] appealable”; and
• yet another article stating that the Federal Circuit would hear a case “that threatens the statutory presumption afforded copyright registration.”

This week is Court Week at the Federal Circuit, with hearings starting today. Due to the heightened spread of the coronavirus, all January oral arguments will again be held remotely. As it has for some time now, however, the Federal Circuit is providing access to live audio of each panel scheduled for argument via the Federal Circuit’s YouTube channel. In total, including a case set to be argued next week, the court will convene 12 panels to consider about 54 cases. Of these 54 cases, the court will hear oral arguments in 40. Of these argued cases, two attracted amicus briefs: one copyright case and one takings case. Here’s what you need to know about these two cases.

This week we are previewing two cases scheduled to be argued next week at the Federal Circuit. We are previewing these cases because they attracted amicus briefs. Today we highlight SAS Institute Inc. v. World Programming Ltd. In this copyright case, SAS Institute, Inc. appeals a decision from the Eastern District of Texas, which dismissed SAS’s claim of copyright infringement by World Programming Ltd. SAS contends the district court incorrectly analyzed a copyrighted program and excluded witness testimony. Notably, ten amicus briefs were filed in this case, six of which support SAS and four of which support WPL. This is our argument preview.

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 dispositions in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, a patent case appealed from a federal district court, and a tax case appealed from the Court of International Trade. We also highlight a new patent case raising a question related to personal jurisdiction and service of process, along with a copyright case that attracted five new amicus briefs. Here are the details.

Here is an 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 recent dispositions in two patent cases and a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board, a copyright case attracting two amicus briefs, new briefing (including a second amicus brief) in a patent case, and two recent oral arguments in a patent and a veterans case. Here are the details.