News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › CAFC

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Polsinelli

The U.S. Supreme Court Will Soon Decide the Fate of President Trump’s Tariffs

Polsinelli on

Key Takeaways: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the U.S. Court of International Trade’s decision to strike down the reciprocal and fentanyl tariffs imposed under IEEPA....more

Holland & Hart LLP

IEEPA Tariffs Invalidated by Federal Appeals Court

Holland & Hart LLP on

On Friday, August 29, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the “Appeals Court”) ruled 7 to 4 that President Trump’s tariffs implemented via the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) were...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Earmuffs, Kids: The Federal Circuit Delivers the F-bomb Right Back to the TTAB

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

The Federal Circuit’s recent precedential decision in In re Erik Brunetti has surely raised some eyebrows in the trademark community (and beyond), not just for its subject matter (the attempted registration of a certain...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down Trump Tariffs: Implications for U.S. Businesses

Amundsen Davis LLC on

On May 28, 2025, the United States Court of International Trade (“CIT”) determined that the Trump administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) to impose (1) overly broad worldwide...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Federal Circuit Finds IEEPA Reciprocal Tariffs and Trafficking Tariffs Illegal but Continue to Be Required at Time of Entry

Husch Blackwell LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held unenforceable the Trump administration’s Reciprocal Tariffs and Trafficking Tariffs instituted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In V.O.S....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Subject Matter Eligibility in the 21st Century: Echoes of pre-§ 103 Obviousness*

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

The evolution of subject matter eligibility after the Supreme Court's decisions in Prometheus v. Mayo, Alice v. CLS Bank, and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics has resulted in a regime of predictable...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Section 101 Patent Eligibility Roundup: Congress and DOJ Stir the Pot (and More)

Holland & Knight LLP on

Last week, Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Reps. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) and Scott Peters (D-Calif.) reintroduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), a bill Sens. Tillis and Coons first...more

Braumiller Law Group, PLLC

Jurisdiction and History of Tariff Classification Litigation in the U.S

Braumiller Law Group, PLLC on

[Written by: Mike Smiszek, Senior Trade Advisor, Braumiller Consulting Group] Several tribunals and courts were established at various periods of America’s history to resolve trade-related litigation, both at the trial and...more

Braumiller Law Group, PLLC

Hot Topics in International Trade - August 2024 - Judicial Deference in Customs Litigation

Braumiller Law Group, PLLC on

One of the most anticipated decisions of the Supreme Court’s recent term was Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. While the specific underlying dispute in Loper Bright isn’t relevant to the trade community—did fishermen...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Supreme Court Rejects TRUMP TOO SMALL Trademark

Fox Rothschild LLP on

“TRUMP TOO SMALL”- This is the trademark that Steve Elster has been trying to get registered for the past six years since filing his trademark application all the way back in January 2018, during the Trump presidency. Since...more

Jenner & Block

Enablement Bar for Drug Patents

Jenner & Block on

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC) decision on enablement in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, 987 F.3d 1080 (CA Fed. 2021). The Court thus left in place a significant CAFC decision making it more...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Can Enablement and Written Description Bars be Lower for Method-Of-Treatment Patent Claims?

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

Patent offices may reject a patent application with claims reciting using a composition to treat a disease, based on the requirement that the claimed treatment is not fully supported by the application. In the U.S., such...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Uncertainty Ahead if Design Patent Obviousness Test is Abrogated by en banc CAFC

Quarles & Brady LLP on

In a surprising move, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) has granted a petition for rehearing en banc on the issue of whether the test for determining obviousness of design patents has been overruled by the...more

Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, LLC

Amgen Ratifies CAFC’s Requirement to Enable a Claim’s Full Scope

Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, LLC on

The Court’s reasoning in Amgen v. Sanofi upholds the Federal Circuit’s long-standing requirement to enable the full scope of a claimed invention. Since the Patent Act of 1790, patent law has required describing inventions...more

Epstein Becker & Green

How Big a Deal Is “Trump Too Small”? – SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

The question of whether a would-be trademark, “TRUMP TOO SMALL,” warrants a First Amendment exception to the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering a living person’s name as a trademark without that person’s permission has...more

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: Supreme Court Affirms High Enablement Bar for Drug Patents

Jenner & Block on

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC) decision on enablement in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, 987 F.3d 1080 (CA Fed. 2021). The Court thus left in place a significant decision making it more...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

The Supreme Court Kept the Door Open to Genus Claims

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook on

The U.S. Supreme Court on May 18, 2023 delivered its decision on the scope of the patent enablement requirement, set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 112, in the antibody dispute Amgen, Inc. v. Sanofi. While the parties obtained...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

For Sale or Not for Sale? Consider a Patent Application First

Amundsen Davis LLC on

For sale, or not for sale- That is the question in Larry G. Junker v. Medical Components Inc. et al., case that started in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and which has now been appealed to...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Judge Alsup Certifies Two Hot Button Issues on Standard for Pleading Willful Infringement for Interlocutory Appeal to the CAFC

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Supreme Court’s Denial of Apple and Mylan’s Petitions Leaves NHK/Fintiv Rule in Place

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C. on

On January 18, the Supreme Court denied petitions for writs of certiorari from both Apple and Mylan Laboratories. Each company sought to challenge the NHK/Fintiv framework that was developed by the Patent Trial and Appeal...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Judge O’Malley Dissents from the Majority on the Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements in IPR Proceedings

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C. on

Last month, in the case In re: MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) dismissed an appeal by MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc. (“MaxPower”) of four determinations to institute inter...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Arthrex's Fallout - How is the Supreme Court Decision Affecting Appeals?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Supreme Court rendered its decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew back in June and now the impact of that decision is becoming more clear. Arthrex had challenged the constitutionality of the appointment of administrative...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Arthrex Amicus Briefs – Novel Arguments for the Court To Consider

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On December 2nd, amicus briefs in support of Smith & Nephew and the United States were filed with the Supreme Court in the Arthrex cases. There were also several amicus briefs filed in support of no party. Previous articles...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Arguing Arthrex – Smith & Nephew and the U.S. Urge the Court To Deem Patent Judges Inferior Officers

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Opening briefs from Smith & Nephew and the United States have been filed with the Supreme Court in the Arthrex cases which, as previously discussed, granted the petitions for certiorari from Arthrex, Inc., Smith & Nephew...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Detecting Disease Is Not a “Tangible and Useful Result” Eligible for Patenting

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

The federal appeals court with jurisdiction over questions of patent law has consistently held that methods of diagnosing a disease or other biological condition violate the Supreme Court’s ban on patenting “natural...more

34 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide