The Future of the CAFC: Is the Court Still Relevant?
The Federal Circuit disposes of 50% of its docket with one sentence decisions merely saying “Affirmed”. The Court also repeatedly says it is handcuffed on patent eligibility even when all judges agree the invention should be patent eligible. The Court matter-of-factly rules that a claim with tangible, concrete, physical limitations can be abstract, and a claim that is novel and non-obvious still lacks an inventive contribution. Methods that rely on natural laws are themselves now natural laws. Certain panels also refuse to follow en banc precedent, including precedent relating to secondary considerations, instead turning secondary considerations into rebuttal evidence. These and other peculiarities require discussion of the continued relevance of a Court that was created to bring certainty to the law.
- A Strange Evolution: The Federal Circuit Has Entered the Theater of the Absurd by Gene Quinn (September 2019)
- Note to the Federal Circuit: Spewing Illogical Nonsense Does Not Make It True by Gene Quinn (August 2019)
- The Federal Circuit Must Revisit Its Imprudent Decision in Chargepoint v. SemaConnect by Russ Slifer (July 2019)
- It May Be Time to Abolish the Federal Circuit by Gene Quinn (July 2019)
- The Federal Circuit Just ‘Swallowed All of Patent Law’ in ChargePoint v. SemaConnect by Russ Slifer (April 2019)
About MCLE Credit
MCLE applications pending in Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Virginia and Arkansas.
Other states require attending attorneys to complete a form requesting credit. Some states, such as Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Washington require attorneys to submit an application for approval of courses taken out of state. These states sometimes require the application to be submitted immediately following the completion of the CLE activity, please check the requirements in your state.