Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

In re Jones, No. 26-130 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 20, 2026)

Denied
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 26-130
Decided
March 20, 2026
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

In Re THOMAS MELVIN JONES, JR.,

Petitioner

2026-130

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

ON PETITION AND MOTION

Before DYK, REYNA, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.

O R D E R

Thomas Melvin Jones, Jr. petitions for a writ of mandamus “commanding the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Board of Veterans’ Appeals” to grant various relief in connection with his claims for veterans benefits “currently pending before the Board.” ECF No. 2 at 3. Mr. Jones also moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and may only issue if petitioner has shown a clear and indisputable right to relief and that there are no other adequate means to attain the relief desired. See Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004). Mr. Jones has

22 IN RE JONES

not met this demanding standard here at least because he has not shown that the normal appeal process is inadequate1 or that any delay in this matter is so egregious as to warrant mandamus relief. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The petition for mandamus is denied. (2) The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot.

FOR THE COURT

Figure on page 2 of the opinion

March 20, 2026 Date

Footnotes

  1. 1 The court notes that Mr. Jones has also filed a petition with the United States Court of Veterans Appeals regarding his claims. Jones v. Collins, 26-743.

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

In re Jones, No. 26-130 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 20, 2026).

Record ID
CAFC-26-130-20260320
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-26-130-20260320

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.