Opinions
on

Today the Federal Circuit issued one nonprecedential opinion in a patent case, two nonprecedential opinions in veterans cases, and ten nonprecedential Rule 36 judgments. Here are the introductions to the opinions and a list of the cases with Rule 36 judgments.

In Re Greenstein (Nonprecedential)

Mark A. Greenstein appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision affirming the examiner’s rejection of all pending claims of U.S. Patent Application No. 14/203,768 (the “’768 application”). See Ex Parte Mark Greenstein, No. 2017-4087, 2018 WL 4360561 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 28, 2018) (“Decision”). Because we hold the claims are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter, we affirm.

De Peza v. Wilkie (Nonprecedential)

Pro se appellant Alphonso M. De Peza appeals an order of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims dismissing as moot his petition for a writ of mandamus. The Veterans Court found the writ unnecessary because the Department of Veterans Affairs “work[ed] in a timely and legal manner to resolve the various disagreements raised by the petitioner.” De Peza v. Wilkie, No. 18-4581 (Vet. App. Dec. 17, 2018). Because we lack jurisdiction over Mr. De Peza’s claims, we dismiss.

Altovilla v. Wilkie (Nonprecedential)

Pasco K. Altovilla appeals from the final decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“the Veterans Court”) affirming the decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“the Board”), which denied Altovilla entitlement to a disability greater than 10 percent for bilateral hearing loss. See Altovilla v. Wilkie, No. 18-2138, 2019 WL 439006, at *2 (Vet. App. Feb. 5, 2019). For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the appeal.

Rule 36 Judgments