Connell v. KLN Steel Products Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Astornet Techs. Inc. v. Bae Sys., Inc.

    802 F.3d 1271 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 28 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a "statute's use of the definite article in providing ‘the owner's remedy’ and its statement that the remedy is for payment of the owner's ‘entire compensation’ ... makes the remedy against the United States exclusive " (second emphasis added)

    In a non-precedential decision, we have rejected § 1631's applicability in similar circumstances. Connell v. KLN Steel Prods. Co., 255 Fed.Appx. 519, 522 (Fed.Cir.2007).

  2. Lietz v. United States

    Case No.: 1:14-cv-00483-EJL-REB (D. Idaho Feb. 15, 2016)   Cited 1 times
    Explaining that "the Ninth Circuit determined in no uncertain terms that the VJRA and § 511 applied to divest federal district courts of jurisdiction to consider a veteran's claim of unreasonable delays in health care and disability compensation"

    Perhaps this is because neither court is considered to be a "district or division" to which venue can be transferred under that statute. Cf. Connell v. KLN Steel Products Co., Ltd., 2007 WL 3396448, at *2 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (Court of Federal Claims is not "district or division" under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)). Even so, 28 U.S.C. § 1631 provides that: