Federal Circuit disposition — 25-103

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
In Re LITE MACHINES CORP.,
Petitioner
______________________
2025-103
______________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States
Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:18-cv-01411-MBH, Senior
Judge Marian Blank Horn.
______________________
ON PETITION
______________________
Before REYNA, L INN, and STOLL , Circuit Judges.
REYNA, Circuit Judge.
O R D E R
Lite Machines Corp. (“Lite”) petitions for a writ of man-
damus directing the United States Court of Federal Claims
to enter a scheduling order and to decide pending motions.
The United States opposes the petition.
Lite and its owners, Paul and David Arlton, are in-
volved in litigation with the federal government and its
contractor on multiple fronts, including a patent infringe-
ment action in federal district court (currently on appeal
before this court) and the present action in the Court of
Federal Claims alleging, among other things, breach of
Case: 25-103 Document: 15 Page: 1 Filed: 12/10/2024

-- 1 of 3 --

IN RE LITE MACHINES CORP . 2
contract. In May 2019, the Court of Federal Claims
granted the government’s motion to dismiss two of Lite’s
breach-of-contract counts. In June 2019, Lite filed a mo-
tion for reconsideration, which remains outstanding.
What followed was a lengthy delay that the govern-
ment attributes to the COVID-19 pandemic and complica-
tions based on the sensitive nature of the litigation and
Lite amending its complaint multiple times (the latest in
January 2022) to add the Arltons as plaintiffs and new al-
legations and counts of patent infringement and correction
of inventorship. In April 2022, the government moved to
dismiss Lite’s latest amended complaint. In September
2022, the court held a hearing on that motion after which
it requested supplemental briefing. The Court of Federal
Claims held a status conference in March 2024, after which
it requested additional briefing on the relationship be-
tween the reconsideration motion and Lite’s third amended
complaint as well as the relationship between that com-
plaint’s infringement claim and the district court litigation.
That briefing was completed in July 2024.
With its motion for reconsideration and the govern-
ment’s motion to dismiss still pending, Lite now petitions
this court for a writ of mandamus. Such relief is “reserved
for extraordinary situations,” Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.
v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289 (1988), where, inter
alia, the right to relief is clear and indisputable, Cheney v.
U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004). We are
not prepared presently to say mandamus is appropriate, as
the case is moving forward and the motions are pending in
part due to confusion about what remains for resolution
based on the overlap of Lite’s subsequent complaints and
filings. However, now that the parties appear to have clar-
ified such issues, we expect that the trial court will act ex-
peditiously to resolve these longstanding motions and note
that unreasonable future delay might tip the balance in fa-
vor of relief upon reapplication.
Case: 25-103 Document: 15 Page: 2 Filed: 12/10/2024

-- 2 of 3 --

IN RE LITE MACHINES CORP . 3
Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
The petition is denied.
December 10, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
cc: United States Court of Federal Claims
Case: 25-103 Document: 15 Page: 3 Filed: 12/10/2024

-- 3 of 3 --