A recent petition to the U.S. Supreme Court urges the Justices to take up the question of whether Judge Pauline Newman’s effective removal from the court by her peers is constitutional and “whether such an act undermines the impartiality and integrity of patent appeals adjudication by depriving the patent owner of a fair hearing before a duly constituted appellate panel?”
The petition was filed on October 16 by Miller Mendel, Inc., which lost its appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) this July. In that case, the CAFC affirmed the Eastern District of Texas district court’s decision for the City of Anna, Texas (“the City”), that claims for a software system that manages pre-employment background investigations were patent ineligible. The decision was precedential and authored by Judge Cunningham. The petition was filed on October 16 by Miller Mendel, Inc., which lost its appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) this July. In that case, the CAFC affirmed the Eastern District of Texas district court’s decision for the City of Anna, Texas (“the City”), that claims for a software system that manages pre-employment background investigations were patent ineligible. The decision was precedential and authored by Judge Cunningham.
Recent Posts
- U.S. Chamber-Led Coalition Joins Voices Telling Commerce to Nix Valuation-Based Patent Fee Proposal
- Trump Order Bars USPTO Patents Employees from POPA Membership But Will Not Yet Affect Telework
- CAFC Upholds Prosecution Laches Ruling Against Gil Hyatt
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, August 29: CAFC Affirms Prosecution Laches Ruling Against Hyatt; Trump Admin Cancels USPTO CBA; Second Circuit Affirms Lack of Standing in Ripple Trademark Case
- CAFC Dodges Key Issues in Reversing District Court Finding for Google on Prosecution Laches