Mar 20 2026
3rd Cir. 26-1019 Panel Decision

In re SHARISSE JUANITA FILUS, as Trustee and/or Beneficiary of the SJF Living Revocable Trust

The Third Circuit denied in part and dismissed in part a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Sharisse Filus seeking to intervene in her underlying civil action against Fidelity Investments. The court determined that the District Court's procedural rulings, including the denial of Filus's motions to strike the defendant's answer and impose sanctions, were not appropriate subjects for mandamus relief.

Mar 20 2026
Fed. Cir. 24-2080 Panel Decision

Janie Hughes v. Douglas A. Collins, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

The Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal challenging an earlier effective date for accrued veterans benefits because the appellant failed to present a valid legal issue within the court's jurisdiction. The court determined that the claimant's arguments amounted to factual disagreements rather than challenges to the validity of statutes or regulations.

Mar 20 2026
3rd Cir. 25-1698 Panel Decision

MAURICE BOSTON v. GRAPHIC PACKAGING INTERNATIONAL, LLC

The Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for an employer, ruling that ordinary workplace discipline and transfers do not constitute adverse employment actions under Title VII. The court also found insufficient evidence to support claims of a hostile work environment or retaliation due to a lack of racial nexus and the employer's legitimate reasons for termination.

Mar 20 2026
Fed. Cir. 24-2158 Panel Decision

DURR SYSTEMS, INC v. EFC SYSTEMS, INC 2024-2158

The Federal Circuit reversed a summary judgment of noninfringement, holding that patent claims for rotary atomizers do not exclude curved surfaces or require separate pieces for attached components. However, the court affirmed the district court's decision to exclude the plaintiff's expert testimony due to a lack of specific design experience.

Mar 20 2026
Fed. Cir. 24-1336 Panel Decision

HEALTHESTATE, LLC v. UNITED STATES, ASM RESEARCH, LLC

The Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment against HEALTHeSTATE, LLC, ruling that the company failed to prove copyright infringement or breach of contract regarding software developed for the government. The court held that the government's use of the software was authorized by the contracts and federal regulations, and that the plaintiff's copyright registrations were invalid due to knowingly submitted inaccuracies.

Mar 20 2026
6th Cir. 25-1638 Published

Fetch! Pet Care, Inc. v. Atomic Pawz Inc.

The Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court's partial denial of a preliminary injunction in a franchise dispute, ruling that the franchisor Fetch! Pet Care came to equity with unclean hands. The court held that Fetch!'s aggressive marketing and abrupt termination of legacy franchisees barred it from obtaining equitable relief against former franchisees who launched competing businesses.

Mar 20 2026
Fed. Cir. 26-1364 Panel Decision

NAZIR KHAN IFTIKHAR KHAN v. ARTIVION, INC

The Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal filed by Nazir Khan because he missed the mandatory 30-day deadline for the June 2025 order and the January 2026 order was not a final decision. The court held that the statutory time limit is jurisdictional and cannot be waived, and that ongoing district court proceedings regarding attorney fees preclude appellate review.

Mar 20 2026
11th Cir. 1:25-mi-00055-MHC Per Curiam

Grissett v. SCANA Energy

The Eleventh Circuit dismissed an appeal sua sponte because the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal before the district court entered any order or judgment. The court held that appellate jurisdiction is strictly limited to final decisions, rendering a premature notice of appeal ineffective.

Mar 20 2026
Fed. Cir. 24-1798 Panel Decision

THE PARALLAX GROUP INTERNATIONAL, LLC v. INCSTORES LLC 2024-1798

The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of attorney's fees to the defendant-appellant, ruling that the patent litigation was not an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285. The court upheld the lower court's findings that the plaintiff did not engage in inequitable conduct and that the surrounding circumstances did not warrant a fee award.