Petitions / Supreme Court Activity

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court did not grant or deny any cert petitions this past week. There were, however, two new cert petitions filed as well as one substantive response. Read on for the details.

New Petitions

In Park Properties Associates, L.P. v. United States, Park Properties Associates asked the court to consider “[w]hether the Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction over a breach of contract claim against the government, where the government signs a contract that establishes contractual obligations for the government but interposes a third-party as a ‘contract administrator.’”

In Katzin v. United States, Katzin petitioned the court to review two questions:

  1. “Whether the Government can claim title to privately owned land and actively work to make that property unsaleable, without triggering the Fifth Amendment’s obligation to pay just compensation for a taking,” and
  2. “Whether after concluding that the trial court applied the erroneous legal taking standard the Federal Circuit should have remanded the case back to the trial court to apply the correct standard.”

New Responses

Responses to cert petitions were filed in two cases:

In Strikeforce Technologies v. SecurAuth Corp., the petitioner filed its reply brief arguing that “[t]he Court should hold this Petition pending its decision on whether to grant certiorari in [HP v.] Berkheimer . . . , and should it do so, hold this Petition pending its decision in Berkheimer.”

In Lake v. Wilkie, on behalf of Wilke (the Secretary of Veterans Affairs) the government waived its right to respond to the pro se petition.


The Supreme Court did not grant any cert petitions.


The Court likewise did not deny any cert petitions.