The Federal Circuit is different from the regional circuits: instead of covering a group of states, it hears certain federal-employee workplace appeals from across the country — for example, cases appealed from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), the agency that reviews federal-employee discipline and firing disputes.
Of the 121 published rulings we track here (1987–2026), the breakdowns below show how they were decided. They describe published opinions only — not the odds of any particular situation.
Of the 121 published rulings we track in the Federal Circuit.
A workplace lawsuit moves through stages, and a ruling can end it at any of them. Here is where the 121 rulings we could classify by stage were decided.
A higher court reviewing an earlier decision. Many published opinions come from this stage, after a lot has already happened in the case.
A ruling where the judge decides the case — or part of it — without a trial, because one side argues the key facts are not in dispute. For workers, getting past this step is often the biggest hurdle.
Of the 1 summary-judgment rulings here, 1 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 0 let the worker’s claims continue.
Procedural decisions and orders that do not fit the main stages above.
Bio-Mimetics, Inc. v. Columbia Laboratories, Inc.
Creative Compounds, Llc. v. Starmark Laboratories
Perrigo
Hoang
Lodge
Adams Respiratory Therapeutics, Inc. v. Perrigo Co.
Creative Compounds, LLC v. Starmark Laboratories
International Union of Operating Engineers v. National Labor Relations Board
Novo Nordisk A/S v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd.
Adams
Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc.
Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Metabloite Laboratories, Inc.
Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services
Adams
Honrada
Bayer Schering Pharma AG v. Barr Laboratories, Inc.
Erickson v. United States Postal Service
Adamsen
Adams
Estrada
Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc.
Former Employees of Ibm Corp. v. Sec. Of Labor
Awada
Adams
Deleonardo
Innogenetics, N v. v. Abbott Laboratories
Adang
Dolby Laboratories v. Lucent Technologies
Adair
MBO Laboratories, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co.
Wade
Ventana Medical Systems, Inc. v. Biogenex Laboratories, Inc.
Adams
Former Employees of Gale Group v. United States Secretary of Labor
Former Employees of Quality Fabricating, Inc. v. United States Secretary of Labor
Breckenridge Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc.
Jordan
Invitrogen Corp. (Formerly Known as Life Technologies, Inc.) v. Clontech Laboratories, Inc.
Union Carbide Chemicals & Plastics Technology Corp. v. Shell Oil Co.
McCollum
Muir
Metabolite Laboratories, Inc. v. Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings
Adams
Former Employees of Sonoco Products Co. v. Elaine Chao, Secretary of Labor
Former Employees of Marathon Ashland Pipe Line LLC v. Elaine Chao, Secretary of Labor
Glaxo Wellcome, Inc. v. Impax Laboratories, Inc.
Downing
Former Employees of Barry Callebaut v. Elaine Chao, Secretary of Labor
Chao
Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals, Inc. And Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited v. Apotex, Inc.
Showing 51–100 of 121 rulings · Page 2 of 3
Explore employment rulings from the other federal circuits.
These figures summarize publicly available published court opinions only. Published opinions over-represent summary-judgment rulings (decisions made without a trial) and appeals, because those are the stages where judges most often write formal opinions. Most workplace disputes settle privately and never appear here at all. A ruling’s outcome reflects many case-specific factors and is not a prediction for any other situation. Read more about how we source and classify rulings.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The classification of outcomes and case stages is based on automated analysis and may not reflect the full scope of each case.