Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez, dba Starlight Consulting Services v. United States

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
RICARDO JOSE CALDERON LOPEZ, dba Starlight
Consulting Services,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee
______________________
2024-1947
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Central District of California in No. 2:23-cv-10391-CBM-
MAA, Senior Judge Consuelo Bland Marshall.
______________________
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
In response to this court’s July 2, 2024 show cause or-
der, the United States argues for dismissal, ECF No. 7, and
Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez appears to urge this court to
assert jurisdiction, ECF No. 5.
On January 23, 2024, the United States District Court
for the Central District of California dismissed Mr. Calde-
ron Lopez’s complaint seeking to renounce his citizenship.
Mr. Calderon Lopez moved for reconsideration and filed an
Case: 24-1947 Document: 9 Page: 1 Filed: 08/21/2024

-- 1 of 2 --

CALDERON LOPEZ v. US 2
appeal directed to the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit deactivated the ap-
peal pending resolution of the motion for reconsideration,
which the district court denied on June 3, 2024. On
June 10, 2024, Mr. Calderon Lopez filed a notice of appeal
directed to this court from a “06/10/2024” decision. The
Ninth Circuit has since reactivated his earlier appeal,
which remains pending.
This court’s jurisdiction to review district court cases is
generally limited to cases involving the patent laws, see 28
U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1); civil actions on review to the district
court from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,
see § 1295(a)(4)(C); and cases involving certain damages
claims against the United States “not exceeding $10,000 in
amount,” 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(2).
Mr. Calderon Lopez’s case plainly does not fall within that
jurisdiction. Though the United States argues for dismis-
sal, we deem it the better course to transfer to the Ninth
Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1631, where the United States
may raise its arguments for dismissal, including whether
this appeal is duplicative of that appeal.
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
The appeal and all its filings are transferred to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pur-
suant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
August 21, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 24-1947 Document: 9 Page: 2 Filed: 08/21/2024

-- 2 of 2 --