Supreme Court Activity

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. With respect to granted cases, since our last update there is no new activity to report. Furthermore, no new petitions have been filed. That said, the government filed two waivers of right to respond; a petitioner filed a reply in a case raising a question related to the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims; and the Court denied certiorari in five cases: two in cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board, one in a trade case, one in a patent case, and one in a case filed by a pro se petitioner. Here are the details.

Granted Cases

No new activity.

Petition Cases

Waivers of Right to Respond

The government waived its right to respond in Bailey-Johnson v. United States, a case raising jurisdictional questions with regard to the Court of Federal Claims.

The government also waived its right to respond in Broaden v. Department of Transportation, a case filed by a pro se petitioner.


In Sandwich Isles Communications, Inc. v. United States, which concerns a takings claim, Sandwich Isles Communications filed its reply in support of its petition. In it, Sandwich Isles argues that this case fits squarely within Supreme Court precedent “holding that where a rate-making authority sets confiscatory rates, a public utility’s property has been taken without just compensation.” Moreover, Sandwich Isles Communication attacks the government’s argument that the takings claim should be filed with the Federal Communications Commission, arguing that “[I]t makes no sense to make a takings claim with the agency that created the unconstitutional taking . . . .” Ultimately, Sandwich Isles asserts that, when the FCC set the rates so low that most of its assets were foreclosed and sold, it was the “textbook definition of a taking without just compensation.”

Denied Petitions