IPWatchdog CON2020 - March 15-18, 2020 - Dallas, TX

The Future of the CAFC: Is the Court Still Relevant?

The Future of the CAFC: Is the Court Still Relevant?

RegisterThe 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.

Related References

About MCLE Credit

MCLE applications pending in Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Virginia and Arkansas.

States including California, FloridaIllinois, HawaiiNew JerseyNew York, North Dakota and Wisconsin accept credits when a course has been approved by another MCLE jurisdiction.

States such as Arizona and New Hampshire do not approve courses and expect lawyers to independently verify courses meet MCLE requirements.

Other states require attending attorneys to complete a form requesting credit. Some states, such as AlabamaGeorgia, LouisianaMinnesota, Ohio, PennsylvaniaTennessee 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.