The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals traveled to Silicon Valley in November, 2008. A three-judge panel heard oral arguments here at Santa Clara Law on November 4th. Below is the list of events that surrounded this exciting occasion.


Federal Circuit Cases Affecting IP
October 22, 2008
Hyatt Regency, Santa Clara
Time: 6:00 p.m., cocktails and registration; 7:00 p.m., dinner and program
Sponsored by the High Tech Law Institute and the Silicon Valley Intellectual Property Association.
In anticipation of the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals’ panel of judges hearing oral arguments on the campus of Santa Clara Law on November 4, SVIPLA and the High Tech Law Institute will present a panel of former Federal Circuit law clerks to discuss cases affecting intellectual property. Panelists will include Heather Mewes of Fenwick & West and Madison Jellins of Alston & Bird.
MCLE: This activity has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of 1.0 hour. SVIPLA certifies that this activity conforms to the standards for approved education activities prescribed by the State Bar of California governing minimum continuing legal education.
Case Preview
November 3, 2008

Time: noon to 1 pm
Bannan 127
A preview of the cases to be heard on the 4th will be given by attorneys from Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman; McDermott Will & Emery; and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. Lunch will be served. Everyone is welcome. To read the briefs of the cases to be heard, click here: law.scu.edu/hightech/federal-circuit-court-contents.cfm
Oral Arguments
November 4, 2008

Time: 10 am to 12 pm
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals will sit at Santa Clara Law on November 4, 2008. A panel of three judges will hear cases from 10 a.m. to noon in the Law School’s moot court room. Seating in the moot court room is by invitation only. The oral arguments will also be simulcast to the de Saisset Museum on campus. Seating at the Museum is free and open to the public.
To hear the oral arguments, visit the following site: http://oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov/
You may search by the date 11/4/2008, or you may search by case number.  The following cases were heard at Santa Clara Law:
Hooker v. U.S. 2008-5059
Rancher v. DVA 2008-7058
Mathworks v. Comsol 2008-1283
Lunch with the Judges
November 4, 2008

Time: noon to 2 pm
Sponsored by the High Tech Law Institute and the Silicon Valley Intellectual Property Association.
Following oral arguments, lunch with the judges will be held in the Mission Room of the Benson Center on campus. Towards the end of lunch, there will be short remarks from the presiding judge followed by a 30 minute question and answer period.
The Federal Circuit Visits the Valley – Discourse and Dinner
November 5, 2008

Four Seasons, Palo Alto
Time: 2 pm to 9 pm
On November 5, 2008, the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology; the High Tech Law Institute; the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology; and the Federal Circuit Bar Association will host a program titled “The Federal Circuit Visits the Valley – Discourse and Dinner” at the Four Seasons Hotel in East Palo Alto. This event is now full.

Cases Argued

To hear the oral arguments, visit the following site: http://oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov/

You may search by the date 11/4/2008, or you may search by case number.  The following cases were heard at Santa Clara Law:

  • Hooker v. U.S. 2008-5059
  • Rancher v. DVA 2008-7058
  • Mathworks v. Comsol 2008-1283

Hooker v. U.S.

This case is appealed from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The appellant claims that the U.S. Government is liable for breach of contracts for trapping beavers and hogs at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in South Carolina. At trial, the appellant alleged that a contract modification extended the hog contract and that the Government breached the contract by hindering his performance of the contract. He also alleged that work on the beaver contract exposed him to radioactive contamination about which the Government failed to inform him, and that the trial court should reform the beaver contract to reflect what he would have bid had he known of the alleged contamination. Finally, the appellant argued that the Government acted in bad faith by reducing his work orders and attempting to induce him to abandon his contracts. The trial court held that the appellant abandoned the hog contract and did not attempt to perform additional work; that the appellant did not produce any evidence to show he had suffered damages as a result of the Government’s alleged failure to inform him of the contamination and, therefore, there would be no remedy available even if his allegations were true; and that the Government did not act in bad faith in its administration of the beaver or hog contracts. This decision has now been appealed to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

Rancher v. Peake

The Board of Veterans’ Appeals denied the appellant’s claim to establish an earlier effective date for her 100% rating for her service-connected schizophrenia. The Board also found that she withdrew her claim seeking a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU). The case was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Appeals, which declined, based upon a lack of jurisdiction to consider the appellant’s earlier effective date argument. The Court also affirmed the board’s finding on the withdrawal of the TDIU claim. The decision has now been appealed to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals on these two issues.

The MathWorks, Inc. v. COMSOL AB