Kamdem-Ouaffo v. Fein, Such, Kahn & Shepard, P.C.

Case: 26-1141 Document: 15 Page: 1 Filed: 01/21/2026

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ RICKY KAMDEM-OUAFFO, Plaintiff-Appellant v. FEIN, SUCH, KAHN & SHEPARD, P.C., BORELLI & ASSOCIATES P.L.L.C., PHILIP A. KHAN, MICHAEL J. BORRELLI, ANTHONY P. MALECKI, DOLORES M. DEALMEIDA, BRIAN LESLIE MCCABE, ROBERT LOUGY, MICHELLE M. SMITH, TD BANK, N.A., PEPSICO INC., JONATHAN C. THAU LLP, RICHARD M. HUNTER, LONDON FISCHER LLP, PETER S. GIVEN, JR., NAIJIE ZHANG, AIDA COSTELLO, Defendants-Appellees ROBERT A. BRUNO, SETTLEMENTS SYSTEMS INC, ARMANDO B. FONTOURA, LUBOJA AND THAU LLP, RICHARD M. HUNTER P.L.L.C., JOHN DOE, JANE DOE, ABC CORP. (1 10), Defendants ______________________ 2026-1141 ______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in No. 3:22-cv-04174-ZNQ-RLS, Judge Zahid N. Quraishi. ______________________ Case: 26-1141 Document: 15 Page: 2 Filed: 01/21/2026

2 KAMDEM-OUAFFO v. FEIN, SUCH, KAHN & SHEPARD, P.C.

Before STOLL, WALLACH, and CUNNINGHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER Ricky Kamdem-Ouaffo filed suit in the federal district court in New Jersey against various private defendants over garnishment of his bank accounts. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of his complaint. He now appeals the dis- trict court’s denial of his motions for post-judgment relief and disqualification. In response to this court’s show cause order, the appellees urge dismissal of the appeal on the ground that it is frivolous. Mr. Kamdem-Ouaffo argues in support of our jurisdiction.

Generally, this court only has jurisdiction over an ap- peal from a final district court decision in 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 in- volving certain damages claims against the United States not exceeding $10,000 in amount, id. §§ 1295(a)(2), 1346(a)(2). Mr. Kamdem-Ouaffo’s case does not fall within any of those categories.1 We further deem it appropriate to transfer to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1631, leaving it to that court to address the merits issues.

Accordingly,

1 Even if Mr. Kamdem-Ouaffo accurately character- ized his complaint as concerning whistleblowing over a for- mer private employer’s use of a substance that was covered by a patent, the action would still not assert a claim “aris- ing under” the patent laws within our jurisdiction.

Case: 26-1141 Document: 15 Page: 3 Filed: 01/21/2026

KAMDEM-OUAFFO v. FEIN, SUCH, KAHN & SHEPARD, P.C. 3

IT IS ORDERED THAT: This matter and all case filings are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit pur- suant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

FOR THE COURT

January 21, 2025 Date