(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that vaccinations given to an infant did not cause him to develop a seizure condition. The parents of an infant who developed an illness called Dravet syndrome after being vaccinated sued the Secretary of Health and Human Services for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. Agreeing with the findings of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the Federal Circuit held in a 2-1 decision that the parents failed to show that the infant's injuries were caused by his vaccinations.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that a patent application covering the design of an athletic shoe bottom should not have been rejected. The applicant argued that the patent claim met the enablement and definiteness requirements even though it used a single two-dimensional plan-view drawing to disclose the shoe bottom design. Agreeing that a designer of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make comparisons for infringement purposes, the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's rejection of the patent claim.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that the U.S. government did not breach its obligations under a settlement arising out of injuries to a child born at a military hospital. The parents brought this suit alleging that the government was contractually liable because the settlement provided for the purchase of several annuities that would make periodic damages payments, but in 2012 the issuer of the annuities was liquidated and the payments were substantially reduced. Affirming summary judgment for the government, the Federal Circuit held that the settlement agreement did not obligate the government to act as a guarantor of the future periodic annuity payments.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed an arbitrator’s decision sustaining plaintiff’s removal from employment as a corrections officer with the Bureau of Prisons. The Federal Circuit reasoned that there was no claim of prejudice for the delay between the notice of employment infractions and the date of termination and it found plaintiff’s other arguments unpersuasive.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Vacated and remanded a decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Appeals Board (PTO Board) that certain claims relating to a wireless communications system are not patentable. In vacating and remanding, the Federal Circuit reasoned that the PTO Board did not consider portions of plaintiff’s reply.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decision cancelling registration of plaintiff’s trademark for a green tea product due to the likelihood of confusion with defendant’s registered mark.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Reinstated a patent infringement claim upon finding that the district court's grant of summary judgment resulted from an erroneous claim construction. The patentee accused several telecommunications companies of infringing its patent for an application-aware resource allocator. On appeal, the Federal Circuit agreed with the patentee that the district court construed the patent incorrectly. The panel vacated in relevant part and remanded.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that two female physicians working at Veterans Administration healthcare facilities failed to establish a prima facie case of an Equal Pay Act violation. The government argued that the physicians failed to raise a fact issue that the difference in pay was presently or historically based on sex. On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the government.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Vacated Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions invalidating three patents relating to videogame software. The patentee contended that the petitions for inter partes review were time-barred because an alleged real party in interest had been served with a complaint alleging infringement over one year prior to the IPRs' filing dates. Finding possible merit in this argument, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded for further proceedings.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the refusal to register the trademark DETROIT ATHLETIC CO. for sports apparel retail services because it was likely to be confused with DETROIT ATHLETIC CLUB for clothing goods. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's ruling.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that certain patent claims relating to a wireless networking device were invalid as obvious. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review proceeding.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that the federal government did not properly calculate the retirement annuity of a retired federal employee. The retiree, who had served in both the military and civilian sectors of the U.S. government, argued that he was entitled to civilian service credit for additional discrete time periods of his government service. On his petition for review of a Merit Systems Protection Board decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed a judgment of no interference-in-fact in a patent case involving the CRISPR-Cas9 system for the targeted cutting of DNA molecules. The Federal Circuit found no error in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's conclusion of no interference-in-fact, in this case pitting the Broad Institute, Inc., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and others against the University of California, the University of Vienna, and others.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that a pharmaceutical company's patent claims in a multiple sclerosis drug were invalid for obviousness. Several competitors seeking to market a generic version of the same drug raised the issue of obviousness when the company sued them for infringement. In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed that the patent claims in question were invalid.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Reversed a judgment that a patent for a pharmaceutical product was invalid on the ground of obviousness. The Federal Circuit concluded that obviousness was not proved by clear and convincing evidence.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that some, but not all, claims in a telecommunications patent were unpatentable as obvious. Finding no error, the Federal Circuit affirmed the determinations made in an review.

(United States Federal Circuit) - A company appealed from the determination in an inter partes review that certain claims of its patent directed to dental implants were unpatentable. Affirming, the Federal Circuit concluded that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in its anticipation finding.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Vacated conviction, otherwise affirmed. A hearing should have been held on the issue of a search warrant where the criminal informant was potentially not credible.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. There was no error in proceedings leading to the conviction of a man for transporting, shipping, and accessing child pornography.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. A confession taken after prolonged solitary confinement did not violate Fifth Amendment rights.

(California Court of Appeal) - Reversed. Defendant appealed from multiple convictions for robbery. He challenged the trial court’s admission of police interrogation statements, text exchange with his mother, and books and documents found in his car. The appeals court found that the police interrogation was properly admitted, but the text messages and the books and documents were not. This error by the trial court was prejudicial and therefore required reversal and remand.

(California Court of Appeal) - Reversed order denying motion to vacate conviction. Defendant pled guilty to unlawful intercourse with a person under age 16 for which he received probation. He was then taken into custody by the Immigration and Naturalization Service and ordered removed. He admitted to violating his probation because he was in the custody of the INS and deported. He also married the victim and had two children by her. Defendant filed a petition to vacate his conviction under Penal Code 1473.7 which was denied by the trial court. The appeals court held that the trials court’s order must be reversed because the motion was denied based on untimeliness and without the presence of the defendant or his counsel.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversed. Because forensic cell phone searches require reasonable suspicion, the district court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained from warrantless searches of his cell phone.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed. Concluding a witness was unavailable due to invocation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, the district court admitted prior civil deposition testimony. The panel affirms, finding any error was harmless because excluding the depositions would not have changed the outcome of the trial.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Denied. The fourth federal habeas corpus petition and fifth motion to stay execution of a man convicted as a minor of capital murder were denied because they failed to meet the strict requirements imposed on successive petitions.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed in part, reversed in part. Defendant’s conviction for second-degree murder affirmed. However, because second-degree murder can be committed recklessly, it does not categorically constitute a “crime of violence.” Therefore, the conviction of discharging a firearm during a crime of violence is reversed.

(United States Second Circuit) - Reversed. Finding the trial court’s exclusion of three defense witnesses violated defendant’s constitutional right to present a complete defense, the panel reverses and remands the judgement of the district court with direction to grant the writ.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Probable cause supported the search of a man's home and even if it hadn't the officers could rely on the warrant in good faith. Sentencing was properly calculated.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Partially affirmed, partially vacated. A man was properly convicted on drug charges and was subject to a sentence enhancement for maintaining drug premises, but the court plainly erred in calculating his relevant conduct and the case was remanded for resentencing.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. An unconstitutional conviction did not occur when an attorney confirmed he no longer disputed restitution while in chambers but repeated this withdrawal in open court.

(United States DC Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. The district court erred in admitting deposition testimony by a witness who was deported before trial because they failed to make reasonable efforts to procure his presence.

(California Court of Appeal) - Reversed. Defendant was judged a mentally disordered offender (MDO) for bipolar disorder. With his bipolar disorder in remission, a re-commitment order was sought for Defendant’s pedophilia. The appeals court held that a re-commitment order must be based on the same mental disorder that was the basis of the original commitment.

(California Court of Appeal) - Writ issued and trial court directed to grant Defendant's motion. Defendant sought to have the complaint against him dismissed for failure to conduct a preliminary examination within 60 days. Trial court denied the motion, but Appeals court held the 60-day rule is absolute and there was no evidence that supported tolling the rule.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Defendant was charged with executing a scheme to defraud local governments by falsely representing that his industrial fans were assembled in the United States. Appeals court found no error in the judgment or the sentence.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Defendant, a prior felon, was pulled over for a traffic stop. A drug-sniffing dog alerted on Defendants car. A search of the vehicle did not find drugs but did find a gun. Defendant was charged with felon-in-possession. Defendant was sentenced to 15 years. Defendant appealed on grounds that search was improper and error by trial court. Appellate court found no reversible error.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. The panel held that the district court erred by concluding it could not listen to the defendant’s allocution before determining whether a reduction of acceptance of responsibility was warranted under the Sentencing Guidelines, affecting the defendant’s substantial rights and fairness of the proceedings.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. The conviction of a man involved in defrauding arms manufacturers into selling machinegun and laser sights restricted by law for law enforcement and military use was affirmed.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed. A mentally disordered offender’s commitment may continue after the offender’s term has expired if their condition is not in remission and they represent a substantial danger of physical harm.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. Defendant pled no contest to driving under the influence and injuring another person. He was ordered to pay restitution. Defendant’s insurance carrier settled a civil lawsuit for the injuries and then the injured party sought attorney’s fees as restitution through the court. The trial court ordered the payment of attorney’s fees in restitution.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. The state court determination that the long questioning and reference to access to her children were not coercion was affirmed, where a woman convicted of first degree homicide of an infant argued that statements made during an interrogation were involuntary and should have been suppressed.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. The defendant’s prior Nevada conviction for attempted battery with substantial bodily harm in violation of Nev. Rev. Stat. Section 200.481(2)(b) and 193.330 qualifies as a felony conviction for a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. Section 2K2.1.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Denied. A man on death row could not show that a reasonable jurist would debate whether the district court abused its discretion denying a motion to reopen his final judgment and for stay of execution and did not establish circumstances justifying the exercise of equitable discretion.

(Supreme Court of California) - A prosecutor in a criminal case has a duty to disclose to the defense information that they personally know and information that they can learn about that is favorable to the accused. This obligation to disclose even includes restricted information about law enforcement officers. A law enforcement agency may disclose to the prosecution identifying information about an office and relevant exonerating or impeaching material in a confidential personnel file.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversed court of appeal ruling that found prejudicial error. Defendant was charged with assault with a deadly weapon, specifically a box cutter. The Supreme Court concluded as a matter of law that a box cutter is not inherently deadly, but that the Defendant used the box cutter in a deadly way. The Court went on to say that the trial court’s determination that the box cutter was an inherently deadly weapon was harmless error.

(Supreme Court of California) - Affirmed. Defendant was charged with completed kidnapping but was convicted of attempted kidnapping. Defendant argued that a conviction for a crime he was not charged with violates the Sixth Amendment. The court held that a criminal defendant can be convicted of an attempted crime despite being charged with a completed crime because being charged with a completed crime is sufficient notice that he could be charged with an attempted crime.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. Juvenile defendant appealed from order of confinement of nine years for sexual battery upon intoxicated 17-year-old female. Appeals court found no abuse of discretion. Affirmed order denying attorney’s fees. Appeals court held that Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5 fees are not recoverable in a dependency proceeding.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. Appeals court concluded that Defendant was property sentenced to consecutive sentences and should be remanded solely for resentencing in light of Penal Code section 1385.

(California Court of Appeal) - Appeal dismissed. The trial court’s order was a preliminary eligibility determination and was not appealable under Penal Code section 1238.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. A sentence following a guilty plea for illegal reentry was proper because assault-family violence qualifies as a crime of violence and is therefore an aggravated felony.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Facebook evidence and cellphone data were properly admitted in the conviction of a man for stealing firearms from a federally licensed firearms dealer.