FedCircuitBlog

This morning the Federal Circuit announced that it has released an updated calendar of its sessions in 2025-2026. Here is the full text of the announcement with a link to the updated calendar.

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in a patent case we have been following because it attracted multiple amicus briefs. The case, Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc., raises questions concerning prosecution laches, the written description requirement, and the boundaries of judicial discretion at trial. Judges Prost, Reyna, and Hughes heard the oral argument. This is our argument recap.

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a vaccine case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. The Federal Circuit also released three nonprecedential opinions in decisions appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the Court of International Trade, and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Yesterday, the Federal Circuit announced the release of materials in the ongoing investigation of Judge Newman’s fitness to serve on the court. The materials include expert reports, deposition transcripts, and orders of the Special Committee investigating Judge Newman. Notably, the materials also include a “Report & Recommendation” filed yesterday. As it explains, the report and recommendation “details the Committee’s findings which lead it to conclude: (i) that there is a reasonable basis to order full neuropsychological testing by a provider selected by the Committee; (ii) that Judge Newman’s continued refusal to cooperate with the Committee’s investigation by undergoing that testing constitutes continuing misconduct; and (iii) that the Judicial Council should renew the sanction of suspending Judge Newman from hearing cases for a period of one year.” Here is the full text of the announcement with links to the materials.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• an article covering how the Patent and Trademark Office is “requiring all parties to appear in person for hearings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board”;
• a piece discussing how “[t]he full Federal Circuit on Wednesday declined to reconsider its first-ever patent eligibility decision involving machine learning”;
• a blog post analyzing how a recent Federal Circuit decision “allowed the court to sidestep broader questions about when patent law issues arising in arbitration contexts warrant Federal Circuit review”; and
• an article suggesting a recent Federal Circuit decision “could make it easier for major brands to oppose trademark applications by market rivals.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, one in a patent case appealed from the Western District of Texas and one in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade. The Federal Circuit also released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Middle District of Florida. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential orders dismissing appeals from the Merit Systems Protection Board. This morning, the court released one precedential opinion in a patent case, transferring it to the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Federal Circuit also released three nonprecedential opinions in decisions appealed from the MSPB, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the dismissals.

Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:

• a report discussing how the Federal Circuit recently confirmed “the narrow nature of the path to appeal the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decisions whether to launch validity reviews”;
• a blog post highlighting how “two more amici have now weighed in . . . in a case challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) rescission of former Director Kathi Vidal’s guidance on discretionary denial”;
• a piece discussing how before a recent Federal Circuit’s decision courts wrestled “with the extent to which IPR estoppel bars patent challengers in district court litigation from raising invalidity arguments based on prior art that was or reasonably could have been raised”; and
• a blog post highlighting how “a backlog of cases before” the Merit Systems Protection Board “that had been all but cleared out earlier this year has started to build again, as the board lacks a quorum to consider appeals of decisions by the agency’s hearing officers.”

This morning, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a series of consolidated inter partes review proceedings appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here is the introduction to the opinion.