This week we talk about the most important standing decision decided by any court last week. Ok, perhaps, it was the second most important standing decision. Last week’s case addresses who may sue, and when they must sue...more
12/15/2020
/ Article III ,
Department of Veterans Affairs ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Pending Litigation ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Rule 36 ,
Standing ,
Veterans
Last week, Seth Lloyd and I noticed that there had been two more Rule 36s in appeals without oral argument from the Federal Circuit’s November sitting. And then yesterday, Bloomberg’s Perry Cooper tweeted that two more...more
Thanksgiving has come and gone, and we’ve all hopefully had a chance to ponder what we’re thankful for (including that a wild 2020 is about to close). Next week marks the start of the Federal Circuit’s last oral argument...more
It’s a few days before Thanksgiving and the sunsets are shorter and earlier, so we thought we’d discuss a CBM before the sun completely sets on that procedure. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics and our case of the...more
Last week we discussed the first Federal Circuit case added to the Supreme Court’s docket this Term, and we wondered when we’d have the opportunity to discuss whatever cases might be next in the pipeline. Lucky for us, that...more
At Federal Circuitry, we frequently update our statistics. We now have almost a year’s worth of data since we started our project of collecting every Federal Circuit decision and collating all of the Court’s substantive...more
Over the past several months, we’ve looked at what Federal Circuit cases the Supreme Court has and hasn’t reviewed, and how often the Supreme Court agrees with each Federal Circuit judge. Today, we got another data point with...more
Last week was court week, and as we noted in our video insights, the Federal Circuit was very busy hearing arguments (not many were cancelled). Given that, it is perhaps no surprise that there weren’t many precedential...more
The Federal Circuit had a fairly busy week as summer officially came to a close. It issued six written decisions last week, three precedential. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics and our case of the week—our...more
Last week was September Court week, marking the unofficial end of summer for Federal Circuit practitioners. The Court issued a total of 25 decisions, including 8 Rule 36 summary affirmances in cases argued last week, as well...more
9/9/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Blackberry ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Facebook ,
Google ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Joinder ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
Next week is Court week. Readers may remember that, after the Court released the September calendar, we predicted that the submission trend would continue. Were we right? Sort of....more
8/29/2020
/ Appeals ,
Appellate Courts ,
Appellate Practice Guidance ,
Court Closures ,
Court Schedules ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Reaffirmation ,
Remand ,
Vacated
While the rest of us wait on the Federal Circuit’s decision on the rehearing petitions in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., there are signs that the Federal Circuit judges themselves may already have moved on.
In...more
3/23/2020
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Judicial Appointments ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pending Litigation ,
Presidential Appointments ,
Removal At-Will
On the same day that patent challengers breathed a sigh of relief once the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of inter partes review (IPR) in Oil States, the Court also threw a monkey wrench into the way IPRs will be...more
After the biggest challenge yet to the Patent and Trademark Office’s popular inter partes review proceedings, the name of the game is largely “same old” for today’s Supreme Court decision in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v....more
The United States Supreme Court decided today that: (1) the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) acted within its rulemaking authority by adopting the rule that patent claims must be given their “broadest...more
6/21/2016
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Chevron Deference ,
Claim Construction ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
Final Judgment ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Standard of Review ,
USPTO
Here we go again: The United States Supreme Court today decided to review two more intellectual property cases. That makes three IP cases so far for next Term (which begins this October), already equaling the number of IP...more
5/3/2016
/ Cheerleaders ,
Fashion Design ,
Laches ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v First Quality Baby Products ,
SCOTUS ,
Sports Apparel ,
Star Athletica v Varsity Brands ,
Statute of Limitations ,
The Copyright Act
The 2015 Changes to the Federal Rules Matter for Your Patent Case and Tech Business: Getting in the Courthouse Door Just Got Tougher -
It used to be that a complaint for patent infringement would survive a motion to...more
4/22/2016
/ America Invents Act ,
Anti-Monopoly ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
FRAND ,
Germany ,
Huawei ,
Injunctions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Japan ,
Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) ,
Judicial Review ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Pleading Standards ,
SCOTUS ,
Standard Essential Patents ,
USPTO ,
Websites ,
ZTE
Not so fast: the United States Supreme Court is set to review the America Invents Act’s (“AIA”) fast-track inter partes review (“IPR”) process. On January 15, 2016, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Cuozzo Speed...more
1/21/2016
/ America Invents Act ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Certiorari ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Rulemaking Process ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l (No. 13-298) to decide “[w]hether claims to computer-implemented inventions . . . are directed to patent-eligible subject matter...more
On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc decision in CLS Bank Int’l v. Alice Corp. The decision includes seven separate opinions spanning 135 pages, but the only precedential portion...more