Nwosu v. Bolduc

Case: 26-1032 Document: 9 Page: 1 Filed: 02/13/2026

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ ADAEZE NWOSU, Plaintiff-Appellant v. MAGDALIT BOLDUC, LUC VAILLANT, THE ARCHDIOCESE OF DENVER, THE CATHOLIC COMMUNITY OF THE BEATITUDES, APOSTOLIC NUNCIATURE, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 206 TOURS, INC., NINA Y. WANG, CAROLYN BALDWIN MCHUGH, NANCY LOUISE MORITZ, HARRIS L.

HARTZ, JEROME A. HOLMES, DABNEY LANGHORNE FRIEDRICH, YVONNE WILLIAMS, KAREN LECRAFT HENDERSON, CORNELIA THAYER LIVINGSTON PILLARD, JUSTIN WALKER, PHILIP S. HADJI, JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS, Defendants ______________________ 2026-1032 ______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in No. 2:24-cv-10726-WLH- SK. ______________________ ON MOTION ______________________ Case: 26-1032 Document: 9 Page: 2 Filed: 02/13/2026

2 NWOSU v. BOLDUC

PER CURIAM.

ORDER Adaeze Nwosu filed this suit in the United States Dis- trict Court for the Central District of California, seeking $1 billion and alleging breach of contract, torts, and violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. After the district court dismissed the complaint and denied Ms. Nwosu’s motion to vacate the judgment, Ms. Nwosu filed an appeal directed to this court.1 On November 26, 2025, the court directed the parties to address this court’s juris- diction. None of the parties have filed a response.

This court’s jurisdiction to review decisions of federal district courts is generally limited to appeals arising under 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); or certain damages claims against the United States “not exceeding $10,000 in amount,” id. § 1346(a)(2), see id. § 1295(a)(2).

This appeal does not fall within any of those categories. We conclude that transfer to the United States Court of Ap- peals for the Ninth Circuit is appropriate under the circum- stances. Id. §§ 41, 1291, 1631.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) ECF No. 3 is denied.

1 Ms. Nwosu moves to consolidate this appeal with Appeal No. 2025-1977. The court dismissed that appeal for lack of jurisdiction, see Nwosu v. Bolduc, Appeal No. 2025- 1977, ECF No. 10 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 21, 2025), and thus denies the motion.

Case: 26-1032 Document: 9 Page: 3 Filed: 02/13/2026

NWOSU v. BOLDUC 3

(2) This matter and all case filings are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

FOR THE COURT

February 13, 2026 Date