{"id":4728,"date":"2012-01-05T13:30:35","date_gmt":"2012-01-05T19:30:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=4728"},"modified":"2012-01-05T13:30:35","modified_gmt":"2012-01-05T19:30:35","slug":"en-banc-sua-sponte-sub-secretum","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=4728","title":{"rendered":"En banc sua sponte sub secretum?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Today marks eight months since the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in the section 101 case <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Dealertrack v. Huber<\/span>.\u00a0 I&#8217;ve been curious why it is taking\u00a0a long time to\u00a0render an opinion in the case.\u00a0\u00a0One possibility is that the panel is waiting for further guidance on section 101 issues from the Supreme Court in <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Mayo v. Prometheus<\/span>.\u00a0 A more remote possibility is that the court <em>sua sponte<\/em>\u00a0has taken the panel appeal <em>en banc<\/em> without requiring further briefing or oral argument.\u00a0 When the court secretly\u00a0did this in <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=12447317146793002049&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2&amp;as_vis=1&amp;oi=scholarr\">Abbott Labs v. Sandoz, 566 F.3d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2009)<\/a>\u00a0with respect to &#8220;product-by-process&#8221; claims, Dennis Crouch referred to the court acting &#8220;<em><strong>en banc sua sponte sub secretum<\/strong><\/em>.&#8221;\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>You can listen to the oral argument in <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Dealertrack v. Huber<\/span> [<a href=\"http:\/\/oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov\/Audiomp3\/2009-1566.mp3\">here<\/a>].<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Today marks eight months since the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in the section 101 case Dealertrack v. Huber.\u00a0 I&#8217;ve been curious why it is taking\u00a0a long time to\u00a0render an opinion in the case.\u00a0\u00a0One possibility is that the panel is waiting for further guidance on section 101 issues from the Supreme Court in Mayo v. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4728"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4728"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4728\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4735,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4728\/revisions\/4735"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4728"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4728"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4728"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}