Opinions
on

Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinions and three Rule 36 judgments. Two of the nonprecedential opinions come in patent infringement cases appealed from district courts, while the other two come in appeals of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the judgments and dismissal.

J.R. Simplot Co. v. McCain Foods USA, Inc. (Nonprecedential)

The judgment is affirmed on the ground that the asserted claims (claims 1 and 6 of United States Patent No. 6,821,540) are invalid as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112.

Innovaport LLC v. Target Corp. (Nonprecedential)

Innovaport LLC (“Innovaport”) appeals the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin’s grant of Target Corporation’s (“Target”) motion for summary judgment of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,775,260 (the “’260 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 8,787,933 (the “’933 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 9,489,690 (the “’690 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 9,990,670 ( the “’670 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,231,380 (the “’380 patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 7,819,315 (the “’315 patent”). See Innovaport, LLC v. Target Corp., No. 22-CV-425-WMC, 2024 WL 451308, at *7 (W.D. Wis. Feb. 6, 2024) (“Decision”). For the following reasons, we affirm.

McDermott v. United States Postal Service (Nonprecedential)

Lance McDermott—entitled to back pay for certain annual leave and applicable interest—appeals a decision by the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) dismissing his petition for enforcement and petition for review because the Board found that the United States Postal Service (USPS) complied with its obligations to pay Mr. McDermott. See McDermott v. United States Postal Serv., No. SF0752-13-0633-C-1, 2025 WL 832178, at *1, *4 (M.S.P.B. Mar. 14, 2025) (Final Order) (S.A. 1–7). For the following reasons, we affirm.

Gibson v. Securities and Exchange Commission (Nonprecedential)

Stefani Gibson petitions for review of a Merit Systems Protection Board (“Board”) final order adopting the initial decision that affirmed an agency action indefinitely suspending her from her position of Personnel Security Specialist. Petitioner’s Br. 1; Gibson v. SEC, No. DC-0752-15-0335-I-5 (M.S.P.B. Jan. 5, 2024) (“Final Order”) (App’x 1); Gibson v. SEC, No. DC-0752-15-0335-I-5, 2017 WL 5710081 (M.S.P.B. Nov. 22, 2017) (App’x 2–19) (“Initial Decision”); see also Gibson v. SEC, No. DC-0752-15-0335-I-2 (M.S.P.B. June 1, 2016) (“Amendment Order”) (App’x 20–24) (denying Ms. Gibson’s request to amend her appeal to include Board review of the reassignment action). For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

Rule 36 Judgments

Dismissal