Opinions
on

This morning, the Federal Circuit released two precedential opinions, two nonprecedential opinions, three nonprecedential orders, and two Rule 36 Summary Affirmances. One precedential opinion comes in a veterans case appealed from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and one comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. One nonprecedential opinion comes in a case appealed from the Court of Federal Claims, and one comes in response to a petition to review a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. One nonprecedential order dismisses an appeal, and two nonprecedential orders dismiss petitions. Here are the introductions to the opinions as well as links to the dismissals and summary affirmances.

Limon v. Collins (Precedential)

Frank Limon appeals a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) that affirmed in part and remanded in part a decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“Board”). For the reasons below, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

Intellectual Pixels Ltd. v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC (Precedential)

Intellectual Pixels Limited (“IPL”) appeals a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) holding claims 1–12 of U.S. Patent No. 10,681,109 (the “’109 patent”) unpatentable as obvious. This decision followed a remand from our court of a Board decision holding the claims not unpatentable. Because the Board did not violate our prior mandate, and its decision was supported by substantial evidence, we affirm.

Pieczynski v. United States (Nonprecedential)

Paul E. Pieczynski appeals a judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

Hart v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Nonprecedential)

Sophia X. Hart petitions for review of a Merit Systems Protection Board (“Board”) decision dismissing her appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We affirm.

Dismissals

Rule 36 Summary Affirmances