This morning the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions. The first comes in a case appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board; the second and third come from two separate veterans cases appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; the fourth comes in a patent case appealed from the District of Delaware. Notably, in the patent case, Judge Dyk filed a concurring opinion. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

Alguard v. Department of Agriculture (Nonprecedential)

Wendy Alguard petitions for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board’s (“Board”) decision denying corrective action in her individual-right-of-action (“IRA”) appeal. We affirm.

Johnson-Arizmendi v. McDonough (Nonprecedential)

Gabrielle E. Johnson-Arizmendi appeals a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirming the Board of Veterans’ Appeals’ denial of her request for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) Benefits. Because we lack jurisdiction to hear Ms. Johnson-Arizmendi’s appeal, we dismiss.

Randolph v. McDonough (Nonprecedential)

Timothy T. Randolph appeals from the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“the Veterans Court”) affirming the decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“the Board”) denying compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for a disability resulting from an August 2000 eye surgery. See Randolph v. McDonough, No. 20- 2876, 2021 WL 4472545 (Vet. App. Sept. 30, 2021) (“Veterans Court Decision”). Because we lack jurisdiction over the appeal, we dismiss.

A. O. Smith Corp. v. Bradford White Corp. (Nonprecedential)

AOS Holding Company, which is wholly owned and controlled by A. O. Smith Corporation, owns U.S. Patent No. 8,375,897, titled “Gas Water Heater.” The two companies (collectively, A.O. Smith), the only persons permitted to practice or profit from the invention embodied in the patent, brought the present action against Bradford White Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of the patent’s claim 1 (the patent’s sole claim), which identifies a “method of interfacing a natural convection vent construction with a water heater.” ’897 patent, col. 6, lines 9–10. The district court held that Bradford White infringed claim 1 and that the claim was not invalid. Bradford White appeals both determinations. We affirm.