Featured / Petitions / Supreme Court Activity
on

Here is an update on recent activity at the Supreme Court in cases decided by the Federal Circuit. There are currently no pending cases previously decided by the Federal Circuit. As for pending petitions, since our last update, four new petitions were filed in a patent case, a case originally decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board, and two pro se cases, and four waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed in a patent case and three pro se cases. Here are the details.

Pending Petitions

New Petitions

Since our last update, four new petitions have been filed in cases decided by the Federal Circuit.

Intel Corp. v. Squires

In this patent case, Intel filed a petition asking the Court to review the following question:

  • “[W]hether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d), which bars judicial review of ‘[t]he determination . . . whether to institute an inter partes review,’ applies even when no institution decision is challenged to preclude review of PTO rules that set standards governing institution decisions, particularly when those rules are based on a misinterpretation of § 314(a) to supposedly confer unlimited discretion on the Director to deny institution for any reason.”

McKinnis v. Department of the Interior

In this MSPB case, McKinnis filed a petition asking the Court to review the following questions:

  1. “Whether the Federal Circuit improperly heightened the ‘contributing factor’ standard established by 5 U.S.C. § 1221(e)(1) by effectively requiring direct proof that a deciding official admitted knowledge of protected whistleblowing, contrary to Congress’s intent that causation may be established through circumstantial evidence.”
  2. “Whether the Federal Circuit erred in affirming the Merit Systems Protection Board’s rejection of an Administrative Judge’s credibility findings without requiring meaningful consideration of contradictory record evidence and witness impeachment.”
  3. “Whether the Federal Circuit’s decision improperly nullifies the Whistleblower Protection Act’s statutory burden-shifting framework by resolving disputed issues of causation at the prima facie stage, thereby preventing application of the agency’s statutory burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that it would have taken the same personnel actions absent the protected disclosures.”

Boyd v. Department of the Treasury

In this pro se case, Boyd filed a petition asking the Court to review four questions.

Spyropoulos v. Social Security Administration

In this pro se case, Spyropoulos filed a petition asking the Court to review seven questions.

Waivers of the Right to Respond

Since our last update, four waivers of the right to respond to petitions were filed: