Apr 14 2026
11th Cir. 1:23-cv-03073-SDG Per Curiam

ANDY DESTY v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES/CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se plaintiff's claims against the Georgia Department of Human Services, holding that the agency is protected by Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. The court concluded that DHS functions as an arm of the state when enforcing child support laws and that neither the FDCPA nor Section 1983 abrogated this immunity.

Apr 14 2026
11th Cir. 0:21-cv-62429-WPD Per Curiam

MONARCH AIR GROUP, LLC a Florida limited liability company d.b.a. Mercury Jets DAVID GITMAN v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A a foreign profit corporation

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for JPMorgan Chase on defamation claims brought by an air charter provider, holding that the bank's transaction cancellation notices were true and protected by qualified privilege. The court rejected arguments that the bank acted with express malice, finding no evidence of knowing falsity in the bank's compliance communications.

Apr 14 2026
6th Cir. 25-1679 Published

Denis McCormick and Farm2Day, LLC v. Merlo S.p.A. Industria Metalmeccanica and Merlo America, LLC

The Sixth Circuit reversed the dismissal of a tortious interference claim, holding that the plaintiff plausibly alleged the defendant induced a breach of business relationships through fraudulent assurances. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of a statutory dealer protection claim and the denial of leave to amend due to insufficient factual pleadings.

Apr 14 2026
6th Cir. 25-1277 Published

Culton v. Unifi Aviation, LLC

The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of an extension to file a notice of appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5). The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish excusable neglect because three of her four attorneys received filing notifications and missed the deadline despite the lead counsel's pregnancy.

Apr 14 2026
5th Cir. 25-40638 Per Curiam

Cheatam v. Family Dollar Store

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Ethel Cheatam's civil action against Family Dollar Store for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court held that the case failed to meet federal jurisdictional requirements despite the appellant's pro se status.

Apr 14 2026
5th Cir. 25-30688 Per Curiam

Whitman v. Lambright

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine stripped the federal court of jurisdiction. The court ruled that the plaintiff's claims were an impermissible attempt to overturn a state child-support judgment rather than a challenge to ongoing constitutional violations.

Apr 14 2026
5th Cir. 25-20297 Per Curiam

Thomas v. Steiner

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment against Babu K. Thomas, holding that he failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claims of employment discrimination and retaliation. The court ruled that Thomas's termination was based on unexcused absences and a failure to provide medical documentation, rather than his protected status or activities.

Apr 14 2026
Fed. Cir. 24-1761 Panel Decision

DEFINITIVE HOLDINGS v. POWERTEQ

The Federal Circuit affirmed the invalidity of a patent under the pre-AIA on-sale bar, holding that a third-party sale of a device embodying the invention more than one year before the priority date renders the claims invalid regardless of whether the invention's details were publicly disclosed. The court further clarified that source code commands are not hearsay at summary judgment because they constitute instructions rather than statements of fact.

Apr 14 2026
4th Cir. 25-1309 Panel Decision

ANTONIO TELETOR AJUALIP v. TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General

The Fourth Circuit dismissed in part and denied in part a petition for review of a denial of cancellation of removal because the petitioner failed to prove exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his U.S. citizen children. The court held that while it cannot reweigh factual findings, the undisputed record facts do not legally constitute the required level of hardship under the statute.