Jul 16 2026
Fed. Cir. 26-1095 Panel Decision

Lynn v. Department of Veterans Affairs

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Merit Systems Protection Board decision denying enforcement of a settlement agreement. The court held that unambiguous contract terms required the Department of Veterans Affairs to pay the settlement directly to the petitioner rather than his designated representative.

Jul 16 2026
9th Cir. 2:22-cv-05961-MCS-JPR Unpublished

Talkdesk, Inc. v. Pham

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that granted summary judgment to Talkdesk, Inc. against its former employee Andrew Pham for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract. The appellate court also upheld the denial of Pham's request to amend his answer and the entry of a default judgment against him.

Jul 14 2026
9th Cir. 2:22-cv-00272-TOR Unpublished

Guenter v. Emmons

The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court ruling that denied mandatory attorneys' fees under a Washington statute. The appellate court held that diversity jurisdiction does not preclude fee awards when the amount in controversy falls below the statutory threshold due to subsequent dismissals.

Jul 13 2026
5th Cir. 25-20409 Per Curiam

Dennis v. State of Texas

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Jeffery James Dennis's complaint regarding a property foreclosure. The court held that the district court correctly rejected claims based on a flawed understanding of Uniform Commercial Code filings.

Jul 13 2026
Fed. Cir. 25-2157 Panel Decision

Shaheed v. United States

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of an inmate's breach of contract claim regarding missing legal materials. The court held that the plaintiff failed to plausibly allege a bailment contract because the delivery of property was not voluntary and no consideration was exchanged.

Jul 10 2026
9th Cir. 25-3016 Unpublished

Navaperez v. Nissan North America, Inc.

The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court order remanding a case to state court due to an incorrect calculation of the amount in controversy. The appellate court held that the district court erred by excluding civil penalties and attorneys' fees from the jurisdictional threshold without providing the defendant a fair opportunity to prove the amount.