Adaeze Nwosu v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co.

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
ADAEZE NWOSU,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CO.,
Defendant-Appellee
______________________
2025-2035
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Central District of California in No. 2:24-cv-09064-JFW-
SSC, Judge John F. Walter.
______________________
ON MOTION
______________________
PER CURIAM.
O R D E R
Following this court’s September 12, 2025 order direct-
ing the parties to address this court’s jurisdiction, Adaeze
Nwosu argues against dismissal. Hewlett Packard Enter-
prise Co. did not respond. We dismiss the appeal.
Ms. Nwosu filed a “Notice of Transfer of Venue/Notice
of Removal” with the United States District Court for the
Case: 25-2035 Document: 8 Page: 1 Filed: 10/28/2025

-- 1 of 3 --

NWOSU v. HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CO. 2
Central District of California, seeking to transfer a case she
had filed in another federal district court involving allega-
tions of fraud, antitrust violations, and unfair business
practices.1 The district court struck the notice as frivolous
and closed the case. Ms. Nwosu appealed to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which dis-
missed her appeal for failure to prosecute. Ms. Nwosu then
filed a letter with the district court seeking to reopen her
appeal, and the court struck the filing for failing to comply
with the local rules. Ms. Nwosu appeals to this court and
moves for summary reversal of the district court’s and the
Ninth Circuit’s decisions.
This court does not have jurisdiction over the decisions
of the regional circuits, see 28 U.S.C. § 1295, and, in gen-
eral, this court only has jurisdiction to review a final deci-
sion in district court 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 id. § 1295(a)(4)(C); and cases involving certain damages
claims against the United States “not exceeding $10,000 in
amount,” id. § 1346(a)(2), see id. § 1295(a)(2). Ms. Nwosu’s
case does not fall into any of these categories, such that we
dismiss her appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Accordingly,
1 See Nwosu v. Hewlett Packard Enter. Co., No. 1:24-
cv-64 (D.D.C.).
Case: 25-2035 Document: 8 Page: 2 Filed: 10/28/2025

-- 2 of 3 --

NWOSU v. HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CO. 3
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
(2) Each party shall bear its own costs.
(3) All pending motions are denied.
October 28, 2025
Date
FOR THE COURT
Case: 25-2035 Document: 8 Page: 3 Filed: 10/28/2025

-- 3 of 3 --