Legal Opinion

Martin v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided August 15, 2011No. 11-158 CPublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

SWEENEY, Judge.

Before the court is defendant’s consolidated motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (“motion”). In this case, plaintiff, proceeding pro se, claims ownership of two patents he asserts were issued to him by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and alleges that the United States has utilized the technology he invented for national security purposes. According to plaintiff, the United States has failed to provide him monetary compensation for the purported infringement of his…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  5. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Floyd v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
  2. Fastship, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  3. Liberty Ammunition, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
  4. Keehn v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  5. Lamson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API