This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and six nonprecedential orders. The first opinion addresses a challenge to a district court’s construction of certain claim terms in a patent case. The second dismisses for lack of jurisdiction an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Two orders transfer appeals (one to a district court and another to an appellate court), one denies a petition for a writ of mandamus, two dismiss appeals, and one grants a summary affirmance. Here are the introductions to the opinions, selected text from the transfer and denial orders, and links to the dismissals and summary affirmance.
Sorrell Holdings, LLC v. Infinity Headwear & Apparel, LLC (Nonprecedential Opinion)
Sorrell Holdings, LLC appeals the final judgment of the United States District Court for Western District of Arkansas in favor of Infinity Headwear & Apparel, LLC, finding noninfringement of Sorrell’s U.S. Patent No. 6,887,007. Sorrell challenges the district court’s construction of certain claim terms, as well as the court’s grant of attorney’s fees and costs to Infinity for a discovery violation. Because we conclude that the district court erred in its claim construction and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees and costs, we affirm-inpart, vacate-in-part, and remand.
Isaac v. McDonough (Nonprecedential Opinion)
Shirley M. Isaac appeals from an order of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) denying a petition for writ of mandamus and a subsequent order denying full court review. Isaac v. McDonough, No. 22-6523, 2022 WL 17951386 (Vet. App. Dec. 27, 2022) (“Petition Order”); S. App. 2 (denial of full court review). In her mandamus petition, Ms. Isaac asked the Veterans Court to compel the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) to act on her November 2021 disagreement with a June 2021 Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“the Board”) decision. Petition Order at *1. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Kent v. Social Security Administration (Nonprecedential Order)
Because Kenneth R. Kent pursued discrimination claims before the Merit Systems Protection Board and stated that he does not wish to abandon those claims on judicial review, the court directed the parties to show cause why this case should not be transferred to a United States district court.
***
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, this case and all transmittals are transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.
In re Swords to Plowshares (Nonprecedential Order)
Petitioners, Swords to Plowshares and the National Veterans Legal Services Program, seek a writ of mandamus directing the Department of Veterans Affairs (“DVA”) to take final agency action in its ongoing rulemaking proceedings to update and clarify existing regulations regarding eligibility for benefits based on character of discharge. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs opposes.
***
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The petition is denied.
Chloe v. Dent (Nonprecedential Order)
Kenneth Antoine Chloe appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia arising out of a private-employment dispute.
***
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The appeal and all its filings are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
Dismissals
- Espinoza-Palmer v. Department of Veterans Affairs
- RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. v. Altria Client Services LLC