U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

The Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal with prejudice of Linden’s patent-infringement action because the representative claim is directed to the abstract idea of conducting a remote doctor visit and does not add an inventive concept.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s denial of corrective action because substantial evidence supported its finding that Abreu Velez did not prove her protected activity contributed to her nonselections.

The court affirmed the Board’s determination that the challenged patent claims were unpatentable, rejecting UPL’s challenges to the petition, claim constructions, anticipation findings, and obviousness finding.

The Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal of Piranha’s infringement complaint because the representative claims are ineligible under both steps of the patent-eligibility framework. The claims address preventing advertisement skipping through receiving, organizing, displaying, and controlling access to data, using generic…

The court affirmed the Board’s denial of corrective action on Walker’s whistleblower-retaliation claims. It held that substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that the Army would have taken the challenged personnel actions even absent Walker’s protected activities, and that the Board considered rather than…

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s dismissal of Thorogood’s removal appeal as moot because the agency rescinded the removal and substantial evidence supported the finding that it restored him to the status quo ante.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Veterans Court’s decision upholding the denial of additional dependency compensation for Ortiz’s children while they received DEA benefits. Applying its prior interpretation of the statutory nonduplication bar, the court concluded that the bar prevents the veteran from receiving the…

The Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal of Avery’s renewed suit seeking the Airman’s Medal and increased retirement pay. It held that claim preclusion barred the suit because the prior jurisdictional dismissal finally resolved the Claims Court’s jurisdiction and the two actions arose from the same operative facts; it…

The Federal Circuit dismissed Ellen Pritchard’s appeal because it lacked jurisdiction to review the Veterans Court’s remand order and because she identified no reviewable legal determination or valid constitutional issue.

The Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal of Myer’s complaint for failure to prosecute. The Court of Federal Claims repeatedly directed him to file a required transfer complaint, warned that noncompliance would result in dismissal, and Myer did not challenge the dismissal grounds on appeal.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s decision sustaining indefiniteness rejections for claims in Gamble’s patent application and denying rehearing as to claims newly rejected by the Board.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of Bautista’s mandamus petition because she had not shown that the VA’s available procedures for seeking an earlier effective date were inadequate or unavailable. The court reviewed the Veterans Court’s application of the mandamus standard for abuse of discretion.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s determination that all challenged claims were unpatentable for lack of enablement. It held that the Board could consider post-priority testing of variants that could have been created at the priority date, found no abuse of discretion in crediting Inari’s expert, and concluded…

The court held that claims 1, 11, and 18 were not indefinite because their scope was reasonably clear, even though they covered scientifically impossible embodiments. It nevertheless affirmed the judgment of invalidity because those embodiments made the claims’ full scope nonenabled, and the court found it appropriate…

The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment for Galderma, concluding that Truinject forfeited the appellate theories it relied on to challenge dismissal of its tortious-interference claim and summary judgment on damages.

The Federal Circuit dismissed ParkerVision’s appeal because the district court’s Rule 54(b) judgment did not finally resolve the infringement cause of action for the ’940 patent, and the district court had not separately certified the ’907 patent judgment.

The Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s denials of Rule 11 sanctions and attorney fees and costs because the district court did not adequately explain its rejection of Pen-Tech’s theory that Epic Tech had notice of potential patent invalidity.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s obviousness rejection, concluding that its claim construction was consistent with the claim language and that substantial evidence supported the finding that Traversat suggested using a peer name in the discovery request.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s determination that Wang’s challenged patent claims were unpatentable because the earlier application did not provide written-description support for the “formed spirally” limitation and therefore did not establish priority over that application.

The Federal Circuit dismissed Crider’s appeal because his challenge disputed the Board’s assessment of the evidence and application of the TDIU regulation to his circumstances, rather than presenting a legal interpretation the court could review.

The Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal of the property owners’ flooding takings claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It held that the owners did not show clear error in the trial court’s finding that they had not proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a new flooding pattern emerged within the…

The Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal of the property owners’ takings complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The owners did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that a new flooding pattern emerged within the applicable limitations period, and the trial court’s jurisdictional fact findings were…

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s determination that all claims of the ’377 patent were unpatentable for obviousness. It held that the claim language encompasses derived quantities representing the audio stream, including Jiang’s vector-quantized codewords, and found no error in the Board’s conclusion that…

The Federal Circuit affirmed judgment on the pleadings that the asserted patent claims are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they claim targeted advertising to maximize revenue without a specific technological solution or inventive concept.

The Federal Circuit dismissed Walker’s appeal, holding it lacked jurisdiction to review the Veterans Court’s application of 38 C.F.R. §3.156(c) to the facts of his claim, and rejected his untimely argument raised in a reply brief.

The Federal Circuit reversed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that Dr. Oguntade made nonfrivolous protected disclosures of gross mismanagement and that his April and May disclosures were properly preserved for review.

The Federal Circuit held that it lacks jurisdiction over Ms. Miller’s retaliation claim under the Merit Systems Protection Board because it is a discrimination case governed by 5 U.S.C.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Court of Federal Claims’ dismissal for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction, holding that the Tucker Act does not permit the court to review a criminal conviction or grant the relief sought. The court relied on the jurisdictional limits articulated in United States v.

The Federal Circuit denied Adam A. Solla’s petition for a writ of mandamus and treated his filing as a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The court held that Solla had an adequate alternative avenue of appeal and that mandamus cannot be used in place of an appeal.

The Federal Circuit held that the asserted claims of Berkeley’s patents are directed to an abstract idea and lack an inventive concept, rendering them patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101.

The court held that the asserted claims are directed to the abstract idea of calculating profitability and lack an inventive concept because they do not require the parallel processing alleged to improve computer operation.

The Federal Circuit ordered transfer of the petitioner's MSPB appeal to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, finding that district courts, not the Federal Circuit, have jurisdiction over discrimination claims under 5 U.S.C. §§7702 and 7703(b)(2).

The court affirmed the Court of International Trade’s judgment sustaining Commerce’s determination that the antidumping petition satisfied the statutory industry-support requirements.

The Federal Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and dismissed in part the Court of Federal Claims' dismissal of Nathan Strong's complaint, holding that the court had jurisdiction over his breach of contract claim but that he failed to state a claim, that the court lacked jurisdiction over his fraudulent…

The Federal Circuit denied Martin Akerman’s petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board and his request for mandamus relief, dismissing the case. The court held it lacked jurisdiction because the administrative judge’s decisions were not final, and found no clear entitlement to mandamus.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment sustaining Commerce’s determination that the antidumping petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry. It concluded that substantial evidence supported Commerce’s rejection of Tenaris’s double-counting theory and that Commerce was not required to develop evidence to…

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s decision to remove Rochelle Wilson from her OPM position, finding the Board’s findings supported by substantial evidence.

The Federal Circuit vacated the PTAB’s decision affirming the examiner’s rejection of claim 1 and remanded for further proceedings, holding that the Board’s construction of the term “flow barrier” was incorrect and that, based on the proper construction, the Board’s obviousness finding was unsupported.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s dismissal of Ladonna Collier’s Individual Right of Action appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that she failed to non‑frivolously allege a protected disclosure under the Whistleblower Protection Act.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s award of attorney fees and non‑taxable expenses to Fenix Diamonds, upheld the joint and several liability of Carnegie and M7D, and affirmed the denial of prejudgment interest.