“Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit . . . err when they dismissed [this] case on the ground of frivolousness?”
“Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit . . . err when they introduced a defense for the defendants that was NEVER introduced in the lower courts (i.e. frivolousness of the amended complaint); adjudicated the defense on grounds (i.e. frivolousness of the amended complaint) that was NEVER [pleaded] by the defendants’ attorneys; and, granted a dismissal of [this] case on the ground of ‘frivolousness’ that was NEVER asked for by the defendants or the defendants’ attorneys?”
“Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit . . . err when they adjudicated [this] case on the grounds that: ‘Golden’s amended complaint here, like his initial complaint, even if not duplicative of the earlier filed action against the government, “contains only conclusory formulaic recitations of the elements of patent infringement as to each defendant”‘?”
“Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit . . . err when they adjudicated [this] case on the grounds that: ‘the complaint itself offers only vague generalities . . . nowhere points us to any nonfrivolous allegations of infringement of any claim by any actual product made, used, or sold by any defendant’?”
“Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit . . . err when they determined [the] factual allegations [were] not enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level?”
