Search
Search | Sitemap Contact Sign Up

Supreme Court Petitions

Search By
Status
Subject
511 Petitions
Docket No.
Case
Subject
Status
Question(s) Presented
Docket No.
24-5983
Case
Taylor v. McDonough
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “If the allegations occurred of obstruction of justice, fraud on the court, and evidence tampering, which led to prejudicial losses with harmful error, can the CAVC and CAFC ignore...
Docket No.
24-5802
Case
Frederick v. McDonough
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “The SHA medical exam is required at discharge by the [Department of Defense and the Department of] Veterans Affairs. When a serviceman is overlooked, would this be a Grave...
Docket No.
24-548
Case
Arbor Global Strategies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“The same panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that makes the decision to institute inter partes review of a patent’s validity goes on to conduct the inter partes...
Docket No.
24-5304
Case
Selby v. McDonough
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “Did . . . Veteran Affairs act in Color of Law when they created a regulation and applied it as if it was an order of the District Court...
Docket No.
24-5296
Case
Payne v. Merit Systems Protection Board
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
Docket No.
24-524
Case
Lighting Defense Group v. SnapRays
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“In Calder v. Jones, this Court held that California courts could exercise personal jurisdiction over Florida defendants ‘because of their intentional conduct in Florida calculated to cause injury to [plaintiff]...
Docket No.
24-518
Case
ParkerVision, Inc. v. TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“Section 144 of the Patent Act directs the Federal Circuit to decide appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) by issuing ‘opinion[s].’ 35 U.S.C. § 144. The word...
Docket No.
24-508
Case
Anoruo v. Department of Veterans Affairs
Subject
Pro Se
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“The Fifth Amendment government immunity does not confer a privilege to lie. See United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U. S. 115,117 (1980). Due process is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution...
Docket No.
24-461
Case
Island Intellectual Property LLC v. TD Ameritrade, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“This case represents a dangerous trend in patent cases whereby district courts grant summary judgment while ignoring factual disputes and/or weighing evidentiary disputes against non-movants, thus depriving parties of their...
Docket No.
24-452
Case
Frantzis v. McDonough
Subject
Veterans
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“‘The fundamental requirement of due process is the opportunity to be heard “at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”’ Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333 (1976). Therefore,...
Docket No.
24-439
Case
Miller Mendel, Inc. v. City of Anna
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether the Federal Circuit in removing a duly appointed Article III judge from judicial duties for her refusal to submit to a mental health evaluation usurped the exclusive constitutional...
Docket No.
24-428
Case
Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“This case presents an exceptionally important question regarding the proper scope of the Hatch-Waxman Act’s regulatory safe harbor.” “Under the Act, Congress declared that ‘[i]t shall not be an act of...
Docket No.
24-320
Case
Soto v. United States
Subject
VeteransAmicus
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“This case determines whether thousands of medically retired combat veterans should receive all the combat related special compensation (CRSC) that Congress specifically authorized for combat veterans. The government has elected...
Docket No.
24-292
Case
Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Subject
Procedure
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“This petition concerns core appellate procedure. In reviewing bench trials, the courts of appeals must ‘discuss’ and ‘analyze’ the district court’s findings, not make factual findings on their own. Icicle...
Docket No.
24-180
Case
Roku, Inc. v. International Trade Commission
Subject
Patent
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“Section 337’s ‘domestic industry’ requirement is the gatekeeper to the International Trade Commission’s unique remedy of an exclusion order. For a patent owner complainant to establish a domestic industry, the...
Docket No.
23-868
Case
Flynn v. Department of State
Subject
MSPB2 Amici
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a federal civilian employee called or ordered to active duty under a provision of law during a national emergency is entitled to differential pay even if the duty is...
Docket No.
23-866
Case
Nordby v. Social Security Administration
Subject
MSPB
Status
Pending
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a federal civilian employee called or ordered to active duty under a provision of law during a national emergency is entitled to differential pay even if the duty is...
Docket No.
23-861
Case
Feliciano v. Department of Transportation
Subject
MSPB10 Amici
Status
Granted
Question(s) Presented
“This case presents a question of critical importance to hundreds of thousands of Americans who serve their country both as federal civilian employees and members of the Armed Services’ reserve...
Docket No.
23-713
Case
Bufkin v. McDonough
Subject
Veterans9 Amici
Status
Granted
Question(s) Presented
“For more than a century, veterans have been entitled to the benefit of the doubt on any close issue relating to their eligibility for service-related benefits. As presently codified, ‘[w]hen...
Docket No.
23-21
Case
Harrow v. Department of Defense
Subject
MSPB5 Amici
Status
Granted
Question(s) Presented
“When a federal employee petitions the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to review a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)(A) provides:...