This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The court also released four nonprecedential orders. Two summarily affirm; one grants a transfer to the Middle District of Georgia; and one grants a motion to dismiss an appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Finally, the Federal Circuit released a Rule 36 judgment. Here is an introduction to the opinion, text from the orders, and a link to the Rule 36 judgment.
Infineum USA L.P. v. Chevron Oronite Co. LLC (Nonprecedential)
Infineum USA L.P. appeals from the final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board holding claims 1–20 of U.S. Patent No. 6,723,685 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The ’685 patent claims cover lubricating oil compositions and their use in internal combustion engines.
Besides raising challenges to the merits of the Board’s decision, Infineum presents a challenge under the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, Art. II, § 2. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1970 (2021), we remanded this matter, while retaining jurisdiction, to give the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office the opportunity to consider reviewing the Board decision. The Director declined, and Infineum has not challenged the Director’s denial of review. We therefore proceed to address Infineum’s challenges to the merits of the Board decision. Because substantial evidence supports the Board’s determination of obviousness, we affirm.
Bruzzone v. United States (Nonprecedential Order)
Following the filing of Michael A. Bruzzone’s combined opening brief and appendix, the United States moves to summarily affirm the United States Court of Federal Claims’ judgment dismissing Mr. Bruzzone’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Mr. Bruzzone opposes.
* * *
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) Mr. Bruzzone’s combined opening brief and appendix (ECF No. 12) is accepted for filing.
(2) The motion is granted. The Court of Federal Claims’ judgment is summarily affirmed.
(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.
Rashid v. United States (Nonprecedential Order)
The United States moves to summarily affirm the judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing Amin A. Rashid’s complaint. Mr. Rashid opposes the motion and moves for summary reversal. Mr. Rashid also submits his informal opening brief.
* * *
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The motion for summary affirmance is granted. The Court of Federal Claims’ judgment is summarily affirmed.
(2) All pending motions are denied as moot.
Cash v. Central Intelligence Agency (Nonprecedential Order)
Responding to the court’s July 6, 2022 order, the parties jointly request transfer of this matter, involving a claim of discrimination, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. See 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2), Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 137 S. Ct. 1975, 1985 (2017); Ash v. OPM, 25 F.4th 1009, 1011 (Fed. Cir. 2022).
Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, this matter and all transmittals are transferred to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia.
Germany v. McDonough (Nonprecedential Order)
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. Jerome L. Germany has not responded.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The motion to dismiss is granted.
(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.