This morning, the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion, one nonprecedential opinion, and one nonprecedential order. The precedential opinion and one of the nonprecedential opinions come in appeals of decisions of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The other nonprecedential opinion comes in an appeal of a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The order addresses a petition. Here are introductions to the opinions and order.
Golden v. Collins (Precedential)
Kevin P. Golden appeals a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”), which denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and concluded that the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“Board”) did not err by omitting discussion of a secondary service connection theory. Golden v. McDonough, No. 21-2606, 2022 WL 17335575 at *1 (Vet. App. Nov. 30, 2022) (“Decision”). For the reasons below, we affirm.
Johnson v. Collins (Nonprecedential)
The judgment is affirmed. There is no final judgment by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals on appellant’s claim for compensation pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 5313, and the Court of Veterans Appeals therefore lacked jurisdiction.
Lone Star SCM Systems, Ltd. v. Zebra Technologies Corp. (Nonprecedential)
Lone Star SCM Systems, Ltd. (“Lone Star”) appeals from final written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) in inter partes reviews (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,557,711 (“the ’711 patent”), 9,646,182 (“the ’182 patent”), 9,996,717 (“the ’717 patent”), and 10,482,293 (“the ’293 patent”) (collectively, “the challenged patents”). The Board concluded that all challenged claims are unpatentable. For the reasons below, we affirm.
In re Carter (Nonprecedential Order)
The United States Court of Federal Claims ordered Darnell Carter to show cause why his tax refund claims should be not dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, directing him to submit the documentation he filed with the Internal Revenue Service to support that court’s jurisdiction. Mr. Carter now petitions this court for a writ of prohibition preventing enforcement of that order.