Fed Circuit confirms Newman misconduct probe

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Fed Circuit confirms Newman misconduct probe

Court of Appeals Federal Circuit Lafayette Park Washington DC
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington DC

Circuit Judge Pauline Newman is ‘slow’ to issue opinions and has refused to cooperate with a complaint over her performance, the court confirmed on Friday

Pauline Newman, a judge at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, is facing a judicial complaint over her alleged inability to carry out her functions and a refusal to cooperate, the court confirmed on Friday, April 14.

Newman, who is 95, allegedly takes longer than average to issue opinions, and longer than is allowed under court rules to vote for other judges’ opinions, despite her working with a reduced caseload.

The complaint, first reported by IPWatchdog and made under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, alleged Newman either had a disability or had engaged in misconduct. The court’s judicial council confirmed the news on Friday.

On Thursday, April 13, Chief Judge Kimberly Moore ordered an expanded investigation into Newman’s alleged refusal to cooperate with an earlier complaint.

According to the order, Newman stated she “was not interested in receiving any documents” related to the complaint and instructed her mailroom staff not to accept them.

Judge Pauline Newman
Pauline Newman

In the original complaint, issued on March 24, Moore found that Newman took much longer to issue opinions than her fellow judges despite having had a reduced caseload since 2022 due to health concerns.

From October 2021 to March 2023, Newman took an average of 199 days to issue opinions compared to a court average of 60 days, Moore found.

Newman also frequently took 30 days or more to vote on colleagues’ opinions, despite a court-imposed deadline of five business days.

In March, Newman allegedly rejected Moore’s suggestion that she take senior status, which would have meant partial retirement.

Responding to that suggestion, Newman allegedly claimed that she was the “only person who cared about the patent system and innovation policy”.

Moore said she was also aware of complaints that Newman had allowed one of her law clerks to “exhibit unprofessional and inappropriate behaviour”.

The order did not include any further detail on the alleged inappropriate behaviour by one of Newman’s law clerks.

Managing IP named Newman as one of the most influential people in IP in 2018.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Peter Ling of Lenz & Staehelin in Zurich discusses trends in patent litigation, the regulation of AI and the benefits of teaching IP
Brandsmiths and Powell Gilbert will contest claims over several UK trademarks in a High Court case examining the ownership and revival of a heritage brand
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader is taking a fresh strategic approach to pricing in its AI strategy. It could amplify calls for law firms to ditch the billable hour
Charles Harding plans to build a new team around life sciences oppositions and contentious work, drawing on his three decades developing a practice from scratch at D Young & Co
The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
Gift this article