This morning, the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions and four nonprecedential orders. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in a trade case appealed from the Court of International Trade involving the scope of an antidumping duty order on certain artist canvas from China. The other nonprecedential opinion comes in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Two of the nonprecedential orders summarily affirm judgments of the Court of Federal Claims—one in a case involving tort claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and another in a case involving mortgage-related claims barred under 28 U.S.C. § 1500. The third order dismisses a veterans case as untimely. Finally, the fourth order grants a joint stipulation to voluntarily dismiss a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.
Printing Textiles, LLC v. United States (Nonprecedential)
Printing Textiles, LLC d/b/a Berger Textiles (“Berger”) appeals from a final judgment of the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”) issued on October 8, 2024, which sustained a determination made by the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) that Canvas Banner Matisse (“CBM”), which Berger imports, are within the scope of an antidumping duty order, Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Artist Canvas from the People’s Republic of China, 71 Fed. Reg. 31,154 (June 1, 2006) (“Order”). Berger submitted an Application of Scope Ruling (“Scope Request”) pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 351.225(c) on December 15, 2022. Following a 19 C.F.R. § 351.225 proceeding (“Scope Inquiry”), on August 15, 2023, Commerce issued its Final Scope Ruling on the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Artist Cavas from the People’s Republic of China: Berger Textiles’ Canvas Banner Matisse (“Final Scope Ruling”). Berger timely appealed the Final Scope Ruling. The CIT then sustained the same, from which judgment Berger timely appealed. We now affirm.
Zilkr Cloud Technologies, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (Nonprecedential)
Zilkr Cloud Technologies, LLC (Zilkr) appeals a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) final written decision (FWD) holding claims 1, 2, 6–8, and 12–14 of U.S. Patent No. 9,210,254 unpatentable as obvious. For the following reasons, we vacate-in-part, affirm-in-part, and remand for further proceedings.
Schofield v. Collins (Nonprecedential Order)
In response to this court’s show cause order, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs urges dismissal of this appeal as untimely. Preston L. Schofield has not responded to the order.
The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims denied Mr. Schofield’s petition for mandamus on February 26, 2026, and subsequently entered judgment on March 20, 2026. On March 22, 2026, Mr. Schofield filed a motion for reconsideration, which the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims denied on March 25, 2026. On June 2, 2026, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims received Mr. Schofield’s notice of appeal in this matter.
Vallejo v. United States (Nonprecedential Order)
Ed Vallejo appeals from the final judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint for lack of jurisdiction and denying his motion for reconsideration. The United States moves for summary affirmance. Mr. Vallejo has not responded.
Kim v. United States (Nonprecedential Order)
Tongsun Kim and Gwanjun Kim (collectively, “the Kims”) move for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and submit their opening brief. For the following reasons, we summarily affirm the judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims and deny as moot the motion to proceed IFP.