Opinions

This morning the Federal Circuit issued five nonprecedential opinions (all addressing lack of jurisdiction and standing) and one Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Barr v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Nonprecedential)

Pro se appellant Douglas Barr appeals a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board dismissing his appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Because we agree that the Board lacked jurisdiction, we affirm.

Harris v. United States (Nonprecedential)

Tewania Harris appeals a decision of the Court of Federal Claims (Claims Court) dismissing her complaint for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Harris v. United States, No. 19-857, 2019 WL 2581622 (Fed. Cl. June 24, 2019) (Opinion). Because the Claims Court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, we affirm.

Earl v. United States (Nonprecedential)

Mariki Earl appeals a decision of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (Claims Court) dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Earl v. United States, No. 19-901, 2019 WL 2714837 (Fed. Cl. June 28, 2019) (Opinion). Because the Claims Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, we affirm.

Ibrahim v. Wilkie (Nonprecedential)

Mr. Jameel Ibrahim appeals an order from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) dismissing his appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Ibrahim v. Wilkie, No. 19-0962, 2019 WL 2376427 (C.A.V.C. June 6, 2019). Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss.

Bank v. Al Johnson’s Swedish Restaurant & Butik, Inc. (Nonprecedential)

Appellant Todd C. Bank appeals the opinion of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) granting Appellee Al Johnson’s Swedish Restaurant & Butik, Inc.’s (“Swedish Restaurant”) motion to dismiss Mr. Bank’s petition to cancel registration of the Swedish Restaurant’s trade dress that “consists of goats on [a] grass roof,” bearing the Registration Number 2,007,624 (“Goats on the Roof Registration”), under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Bank v. Al Johnson’s Swedish Restaurant & Butik, Inc., No. 92069777 (T.T.A.B. Mar. 27, 2019) (A.A. 2–16); see A.A. 14–16 (Petition to Cancel). For the limited purpose of determining whether Mr. Bank has standing to bring his claim, we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(4)(A) (2012).

Rule 36 Judgments