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
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, June 20: Advocate General Tells CJEU to Affirm €4 Billion Antitrust Fine Against Google; Recentive Challenges Section 101 Invalidation of Machine Learning Claims
- Stewart Expands on ‘Settled Expectations’ Criteria in Interim Discretionary Denial Process
- Mediocre Results so Far for Deferred Subject Matter Eligibility Response Pilot
- European Patent Organization: Responses from ChatGPT Do Not Represent the “Understanding of a Skilled Person”
- Blackburn and Hirono Sign on to PERA 2025