Supreme Court Won’t Review No-Opinion Fed. Cir. Patent Rulings

The U.S. Supreme Court passed up two opportunities to review the Federal Circuit’s practice of affirming lower court decisions without issuing opinions.

One challenge, brought by inventor Charles Fote, arose from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejection of his application for a patent related to an electronic payment system as ineligible for patent protection. The other challenge stems from an infringement suit by Kaneka Corp., the owner of a patent on industrial processes for manufacturing oxidized coenzyme Q10.

The Federal Circuit issues orders without opinions under its Rule 36 in about one-third of its cases, according to Kaneka. The Supreme Court has denied several petitions raising constitutional and statutory challenges to the rule in the past.

The Federal Circuit affirmed the patent office’s rejection of Fote’s application without opinion. Fote argued the Federal Circuit practice warrants Supreme Court review because it deprives “the legal system of further development of the law,” and “deprives parties of the opportunity to seek further review of the merits through rehearing, rehearing en banc, or a petition for certiorari.”

A district court rejected Kaneka’s interpretation of key patent terms and ruled Xiamen Kingdomway Group and other Chinese manufacturers didn’t infringe the patent. The Federal Circuit affirmed.

Kaneka had asked the Supreme Court to review the Federal Circuit’s “excessive use of Rule 36" in claim construction appeals, which Kaneka said “results in uncertain and conflicting claim constructions that prevent patentees from subsequently enforcing their valid patents.”

The cases are Fote v. Iancu, U.S., No. 19-1129, review denied 5/18/20; and Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Grp., U.S., No. 19-1228, review denied 5/18/20.