Here are the materials in Jones v. United States (Fed. Cl.):
150-1 US Motion for Summary Judgment
Prior post here.
Federal Circuit
Federal Circuit Decides Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona Inc. v. United States [trust breach re: Phoenix Indian School]
Briefs and lower court materials here.
Cert Petition by Western Ranchers and Farmers Challenging Reserved Water Rights [updated]
Here is the petition in Bales v. United States:
Question presented:
Whether, against the legal backdrop of Congress’s and this Court’s recognition of the primacy of state law to determine, quantify, and administer water rights, a federal court may deem federal agency regulatory action under the Endangered Species Act to constitute the adjudication and administration of water rights for tribal purposes.
Lower court materials here.
Update:
Federal Circuit Affirms Rejection of Pro Se Property Owner’s Claims against US re: Lake Quinault
Here are the materials in Landreth v. United States:
Lower court materials here.
Update in Remanded “Bad Men” Case regarding Shooting of Indian Man
Here are the materials in Jones v. United States (Fed. Cl.):
Prior posts here.
Federal Circuit Decides Baley v. United States [Indian reserved water rights to Klamath River water predate farmers]
Here is the opinion.
Here are the briefs:
klamath-tribe-amicus-brief.pdf
Federal Circuit Revives Portions of Lummi/Hopi/Fort Berthold Housing Authorities NAHASDA Claims
Here is the opinion in Lummi Tribe v. United States (Fed. Cir.). An excerpt:
[W]e conclude that because neither the Claims Court nor this court previously adjudicated Lummi’s breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of trust claims, the Claims Court erred by dismissing Lummi’s entire case.
Briefs:
Prior posts here.
Federal Circuit Briefs in Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona v. United States
Federal Circuit Rejects Indian Leaseholder Claims
No State Sovereign Immunity in Patent Case [Relying on Saint Regis Mohawk Decision]
From the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals:
And, contrary to UMN’s arguments, Saint Regis did not
base its reasoning on implied abrogation of tribal sovereign
immunity. Instead, Saint Regis concluded that IPR was an
agency reconsideration proceeding to which sovereign immunity does not apply in the first instance. 896 F.3d at 1329. This reasoning applies equally to states as it does to
tribes.
Article discussing the opinion here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.