This week the Federal Circuit will hold 15 panel hearings and hear oral arguments in about 57 cases. Of all these cases, the only one attracting an amicus brief is Monk v. Wilkie, a case where nine veterans seek to overturn the denial of their request for class certification, the result of a 4-4 split of the en banc Court of Veterans Appeals. Notably, however, on Friday next week (outside of the traditional week the court hears arguments) the court will hold a hearing in In re Google LLC, another case attracting an amicus brief. In this case Google is seeking a writ of mandamus ordering the Eastern District of Texas to dismiss this patent case for improper venue.
As previewed on this blog, in this case the veterans (including Conley F. Monk, Jr., the first-named plaintiff) sought class certification to assert claims of unreasonable system-wide delay by the Board of Veterans Appeals in deciding appeals of denials of veterans’ claims. According to Monk, the Court of Veterans Appeals misinterpreted Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) when it denied class certification. Notably, the case attracted four amicus briefs in favor of Monk and his fellow veterans/appellants.
A Yale law student, Arjun Mody, will make the appellants’ opening argument (supervised by Michael Wishnie of Yale Law School’s Veterans Legal Services Clinic), while Lynn Neuner of Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP will argue on behalf of the appellants in rebuttal.
Martin F. Hockey, Jr. of the Department of Justice will argue on behalf of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
This case is the first case scheduled to be argued this morning at 10:00 A.M. in Courtroom 402.
As previewed on this blog, in this case Google is seeking to have the court decide whether “a defendant who keeps computer equipment in the facility of a third party in a judicial district has a ‘regular and established place of business’ in that district under the patent venue statute.” Google received support from seventeen companies in the form of an amicus brief arguing that the right to a writ of mandamus is “clear and indisputable” and that mandamus is “appropriate” in the circumstances.
Thomas P. Schmidt will argue on behalf of the petitioner, Google, while Jeffrey R. Bragalone will argue on behalf of the respondent, Super Interconnect Technologies LLC. This case is scheduled to be argued on Friday, December 13, at 10:00 A.M. in Courtroom 402.