FedCircuitBlog

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 how a recent decision in a patent case by the Federal circuit focuses “on a novel argument about provisional rights”;
• another blog post discussing how a recent Federal Circuit decision “illustrates circumstances under which the [Patent Trial and Appeal] Board’s obviousness determination did not pass muster.”;
• a piece reporting how the Council for Innovation Promotion recently released a report “urging the Trump Administration and Congress to take 18 key steps to strengthen the U.S. IP system”; and
• a report claiming a recent Federal Circuit decision “has created pitfalls for entities using a type of patent claim that describes an improvement on previous technology, making the so-called Jepson format, which is already uncommon, even less appealing for applicants.”

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

• a report discussing how the neurosurgeon who testified that Judge Newman is “fit to serve . . . responded to a barrage of criticisms aimed at his analysis”;
• an article covering how the Federal Circuit recently reviewed a decision of the Appeals Review Panel of the Patent and Trademark Office for the first time;
• a piece reporting how the Supreme Court recently denied “several high-profile IP petitions, including two that touch on the [Federal Circuit]’s controversial use of one-word affirmances under Rule 36”; and
• an article recounting how “[a]dministrative judges with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board should prepare themselves for layoffs, according to an email from Chief Administrative Patent Judge Scott Boalick.”

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

• an article reporting how last week in a “rare en banc” oral argument “Google LLC urged ten Federal Circuit judges to wipe out a $20 million Texas patent verdict over smart thermostats, arguing the jury shouldn’t have heard an expert witness’ description of settlements the plaintiff reached with three companies”;
• a blog post explaining how in a recent trademark opinion the Federal Circuit “clarified that terms once considered generic do not necessarily remain permanently unregistrable”;
• a piece claiming that a recent decision by the Federal Circuit “ensures that Jepson claims will never be used again”; and
• a report explaining how recently a “patent owner has told the U.S. Supreme Court that there’s momentum behind its push for scrutiny of the Federal Circuit’s one-word orders in patent cases and its challenge to courts’ summary judgment practices in such matters.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, three nonprecedential opinions, one nonprecedential order, two summary affirmances, and one errata. Both precedential opinions come in patent cases. Of the nonprecedential opinions, two come in patent cases and the other comes in a government contract case. The lone nonprecedential order dismisses an appeal. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the summary affirmances, order, and errata.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders and an erratum. One order denies a petition for a writ of mandamus. The other grants a motion to remand for further proceedings. The erratum makes grammatical changes to a precedential opinion released yesterday. Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential order dismissing a petition for review. Here is text from today’s orders and links to the erratum and yesterday’s dismissal.