Apr 15 2026
9th Cir. 3:22-cv-00193-SLG Unpublished

DION KIRK HUMPHREY v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and UNITED STATES BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO FIREARMS & EXPLOSIVES

The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment upholding a federal firearm prohibition against a man convicted of a local misdemeanor domestic violence offense. The court rejected arguments that the law violated the Ex Post Facto Clause or the Second Amendment, ruling that the statute regulates conduct and applies to local convictions.

Apr 15 2026
11th Cir. 1:21-cv-04531-TWT Per Curiam

K. JEFF CARNEY, M.D., PHARM.D v. EMORY UNIVERSITY

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Emory University, holding that requiring a physician to undergo leadership coaching did not constitute a prohibited medical examination under the ADA. The court reasoned that the coaching focused on professional conduct and conflict resolution rather than inquiries into physical or mental impairments.

Apr 15 2026
11th Cir. 4:22-cv-00126-RH-MJF Per Curiam

TIMOTHY SNEED v. A. ACOSTA-MARTINEZ Site Medical Director NAFINA LANGLEY

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for a prison medical director, ruling that an inmate failed to prove a genuine dispute of material fact regarding an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim. The court held that the inmate's own declarations contradicted his assertion of a serious medical need and that he provided no verifying medical evidence showing that treatment delays caused detrimental effects.

Apr 15 2026
11th Cir. 1:21-cv-04531-TWT Per Curiam

K. JEFF CARNEY, M.D., PHARM.D v. EMORY UNIVERSITY

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Emory University, holding that requiring a physician to undergo leadership coaching did not constitute a prohibited medical examination under the ADA. The court reasoned that the coaching was focused on professional skills rather than inquiries into physical or mental impairments.

Apr 15 2026
10th Cir. 1:24-CV-00443-JCH-LF) Panel Decision

SANDRA VASQUEZ-GARCIA v. CENTURION, LLC; CENTURION CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE OF NEW MEXICO, LLC; MHM HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, INC.; WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES INC.; SUMMIT FOOD SERVICE L...

The Tenth Circuit reversed a district court's dismissal of a prisoner's Eighth Amendment medical care claims, holding that the lower court erred by applying a pleading standard to a statute of limitations defense that requires factual development. The court clarified that accrual of a deliberate indifference claim depends on when a plaintiff knew or should have known of the defendant's subjective state of mind, a determination inappropriate for resolution on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.

Apr 15 2026
10th Cir. 5:23-CV-03032-EFM-BGS Panel Decision

ADRIAN D. LIVINGSTON v. UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF WYANDOTTE COUNTY; WYANDOTTE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; ADAM SOKOLOFF; TAYLOR HINES; (FNU) SANDERS; (FNU) CONTRERAS; DONA...

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Adrian Livingston's Section 1983 claims, ruling that his post-acquittal detention was justified by good-faith reliance on an inaccurate detention system. The court rejected arguments regarding malicious prosecution, statute of limitations, and supervisory liability, finding no constitutional violations or policy failures by the county.

Apr 15 2026
10th Cir. 1:24-CV-00006-SWS Panel Decision

FOUR B PROPERTIES, LLC; RANCH 10, LLC; GARY A. BINNING v. THE NATURE CONSERVANCY

The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for The Nature Conservancy, ruling that an alleged oral promise to allow construction was too indefinite to support a claim of promissory estoppel. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to meet Wyoming's strict proof requirements for a clear promise, reasonable reliance, or the necessity of enforcement to avoid injustice.

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.