This morning the Federal Circuit issued two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The court also issued two nonprecedential orders denying petitions for writs of mandamus in patent cases pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York and the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Finally, the court issued a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.
Jaliwala v. Department of Homeland Security (Nonprecedential)
Mr. Jaliwala was removed from his position as a Criminal Investigator at the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for failing to meet a condition of employment—one of the physical fitness requirements set by the agency. He challenged his removal to the Merit Systems Protection Board, which affirmed his removal and rejected his affirmative defenses. Jaliwala v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. SF-0752-20-0323-I-1, 2020 WL 5879703 (M.S.P.B. Oct. 1, 2020). On appeal, Mr. Jaliwala challenges the Board’s rejection of his affirmative defenses. For the reasons below, we affirm.
Martin v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Nonprecedential)
Tracey Martin appeals from a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (“the Board”) dismissing her appeal as untimely filed. See Martin v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., No. DC-0845-20-0640-I-1 (M.S.P.B. June 11, 2020). Because Martin has not shown that her appeal was timely or good cause why the time limit should be waived, we affirm.
In re OnePlus Technologies (Shenzhen) Co. (Nonprecedential Order)
OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (“OnePlus”) petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas to dismiss the five underlying patent infringement actions for insufficient service of process and lack of personal jurisdiction. WSOU Investments LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development (referred to here as “Brazos”) opposes. OnePlus also moves for oral argument. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. (“TP-Link”) moves with opposition for leave to file an out-of-time brief amicus curiae in support of OnePlus.
* * *
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) TP-Link’s motion is granted. ECF No. 7-2 is accepted for filing.
(2) The petition is denied.
(3) The motion for oral argument is denied.
In re Midwest Athletics and Sports Alliance LLC (Nonprecedential Order)
Midwest Athletics and Sports Alliance LLC (“MASA”) petitions for a writ of mandamus challenging an order narrowing the number of patents it could assert in this case. Xerox Corporation opposes. MASA replies.
* * *
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The petition is denied.