U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court's summary judgment that Vertex's Fertility Support Program violates the Anti‑Kickback Statute, but reversed the judgment on the Beneficiary Inducement Statute and on HHS's advisory‑opinion timing regulations, remanding for further proceedings.

The Court affirmed summary judgment for the District, holding that Title VII’s business necessity test requires only that an employment practice reasonably fit the employer’s legitimate interests and that the District satisfied this test for both challenged practices and the plaintiffs failed to propose an adequate…

The D.C. Circuit dismissed the NRA's appeal, holding that as a nonparty that only intervened to unseal the record, the NRA lacks standing to appeal the district court's orders and judgment. The court relied on the well‑settled rule that only parties may appeal adverse judgments.

The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of the §1983 retaliation claim, holding that The Big Board’s refusal to enforce the District’s masking and proof‑of‑vaccination orders was not protected expressive conduct, but that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged that Eric Flannery’s protected speech was a…

The D.C. Circuit denied the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal and dismissed the request for an administrative stay, finding that the government failed to meet the stringent Nken standard and that its arguments were forfeited. The court also granted the parties’ motions to participate as amici curiae.

The court affirmed summary judgment upholding the Librarian of Congress's medical-device repair exemption from the DMCA's anticircumvention prohibition. Applying APA review rather than independently deciding infringement, the court held that the Librarian reasonably considered all four fair-use factors and adequately…

The court affirmed the denial of David Floyd's ineffective-assistance claim arising from the inclusion of a firearm enhancement in his plea-agreement sentencing estimate. It held that counsel's agreement to the enhancement was not objectively unreasonable given the factual proffer, Floyd's repeated failure to object…

The court denied Heroes Technology’s petition for review, holding that the Consumer Product Safety Commission acted within its statutory authority when it classified infant support cushions as durable infant or toddler products.

The court affirmed the district court’s denial of Olson’s motion to reconsider his pretrial detention. Applying clear-error review, it held that the district court reasonably found that the charged offenses, the strength of the evidence, Olson’s history and characteristics, and the risks of flight and witness…

The court affirmed the district court’s pretrial detention order, concluding that the district court did not improperly shift the government’s burden or require certainty that release would be safe.

The court affirmed summary judgment for the Service, holding that the appellants' conceptual challenge to a landings-only annual catch limit was not moot after a successor rule continued the same operative approach.

The court affirmed dismissal of all claims. It held that the appellants lacked standing to seek prospective relief against the FCC because they did not plausibly allege a substantial risk of recurring racial discrimination, while their claims against private appellees failed on the merits because the complaint did not…

The court held that the FDA correctly concluded that Actavis had not forfeited its 180-day marketing exclusivity under the failure-to-market provision because a triggering event had not occurred for every Paragraph IV certification in Actavis's ANDA.

The court denied petitions challenging FERC's authorization of an LNG terminal and associated pipeline under the Natural Gas Act and NEPA. It held that Section 3 of the NGA creates a presumption favoring terminal authorization, that FERC reasonably evaluated the pipeline's need and benefits, and that FERC's…

The court denied the petition for review, holding that EPA reasonably determined that its revised and retained secondary air-quality standards would not affect protected species or habitat and that EPA made its effects determination at a permissible time.

The court affirmed the denial of Richardson’s motion to dismiss, holding that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is constitutional as applied to a felon who possessed a firearm while still serving a criminal sentence through non-custodial supervision.

A per curiam panel of the D.C. Circuit affirmed the convictions of Enyinna Onyewu, Emmanuel Sumo, and Quaysa Flumo after a nine-day joint trial for conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery and related counts arising from ten January 2018 commercial robberies.

The D.C. Circuit affirmed the District Court's exclusion of both of Kevin Welch's expert causation witnesses and the resulting summary judgment for MedStar Washington Hospital Center in this medical malpractice action arising from post-surgical strokes. Dr.

The court denied Preferred's petition for review and granted the Board's cross-petition for enforcement. It held that Preferred was not prejudiced by the handling of its evidentiary proffer, that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that the picketing lacked a recognitional or organizational object, and…

The D.C. Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction that had barred implementation of OMB Memorandum M-25-13, a short-lived directive telling agencies to temporarily pause federal financial-assistance activities pending review against newly issued executive orders.

The D.C. Circuit held that a pro se notice of appeal should be construed to include a motion under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) or (6) when it can reasonably be read as recognizing that the appeal is late, providing reasons for the lateness, and requesting extra time to appeal, and that de novo review…

The D.C. Circuit reversed the denial of the defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law, holding that the jury's $120,000 fraudulent-misrepresentation damages award violated the First Amendment because the protected content of the 'Rigging the Election' video, not Allison Maass's tortious infiltration, was the…

The court denied Adsync’s petition challenging the FAA’s second award of the hardware contract to Adacel. It held that the FAA properly treated Adsync’s revised price reductions as subject to a tailored remedial-order review rather than a price-realism analysis, that substantial evidence supported rejecting certain…

The court held that the FDA and Teva improperly treated the different-manufacturer exception as permitting any safe, optional labeling variation. The exception permits only changes required by the change in manufacturers, so the FDA could not rely on it to approve removal of the braille dosage and associated pharmacy…

The court held that the IRA's review bar precludes review of CMS's drug-specific determinations but does not preclude review of generally applicable legal standards governing those determinations.

The court affirmed summary judgment for the government, holding that Servier did not qualify as a specified small manufacturer because it did not produce, prepare, propagate, compound, convert, or process any Tibsovo tablets that were dispensed to Part D patients in 2021.

The court dismissed Music Choice's petition for review because the Copyright Royalty Board's regulatory-interpretation ruling was not a reviewable determination under Section 803(c)(4), and Music Choice was not a qualifying participant bound by that ruling.

The court denied Knight’s petition for review of the Board’s denial of attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. It held that substantial evidence supported the Board’s determination that the Administrator’s position was substantially justified both when initiating the enforcement proceeding and when…

The court held that Hesai's challenge to its 2024 designation remained live despite a later designation, because the record did not establish that the earlier designation had no continuing reputational effect or that the procedural violation would not recur.

The court affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction against Eximbank's resumption of loan disbursements for a natural-gas project in Mozambique. It held that the appellants lacked organizational standing based on the denial of notice-and-comment participation, alleged increased service burdens, and the absence of…

The court denied petitions challenging EPA’s designation of PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA. It held that the statutory phrase permitting designation of substances that “may present substantial danger” requires a scientifically possible, serious, and real risk, not certainty; it also upheld EPA’s…

The court held that a plaintiff bringing a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in federal court need not exhaust administrative remedies available under District of Columbia law unless Congress has imposed such a requirement.

The court affirmed dismissal of the complaint because the appellant failed to allege an injury that was concrete, particularized, fairly attributable to the challenged conduct, and redressable by the requested relief.

The court held that DJI's challenge to its 2025 designation was not moot, rejected DJI's due-process, evidentiary, and disparate-treatment arguments, and affirmed those portions of the judgment.

The court dismissed PAHO's interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the challenged jurisdictional-discovery order was not effectively final under the collateral order doctrine.

The court entered judgment enforcing the National Labor Relations Board's order against Vermont Information Processing, Inc., as modified by the court's May 26, 2026 opinion. The judgment requires reinstatement and monetary, recordkeeping, notice-posting, and certification remedies for Christopher Bendel.

The court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Perales’s complaint for lack of jurisdiction to review actions by the California state agencies. The court also rejected any asserted basis for relief against the United States because Perales did not name the United States as a defendant.

The D.C. Circuit affirmed the denial of Edward Williams's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his 1997 guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Williams argued that, under Rehaif v.

The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court's denial of qualified immunity to five MPD officers who detained Jared Fishman for approximately twenty-five minutes after a 9-1-1 caller reported a possible kidnapping or child abuse.

The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment for Friends of Animals, holding that ESA § 1533(e) unambiguously authorizes similarity-of-appearance treatment only for species not already listed as endangered or threatened, so the Service was not required to consider treating the…