Lange v. Litman

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
MICHAEL R. LANGE, AND SKY ROBOTICS, INC.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
MARK A. LITMAN, AND MARK A. LITMAN &
ASSOCIATES, P.A.,
Defendants-Appellees,
AND
IPC EAGLE, INC.,
Defendant.
______________________
2012-1565
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
District of Minnesota in No. 11-CV-2387, Judge Donovan
W. Frank.
______________________
ON MOTION
______________________
Before DYK, MAYER, and O'MALLEY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
ORDER
2 MICHAEL R. LANGE v. MARK A. LITMAN
On March 11, 2013, appellees Mark A. Litman and
Mark A. Litman & Associates filed a motion seeking
reversal without oral argument and a remand with in-
structions to dismiss the plaintiff’s malpractice claims for
lack of jurisdiction. Appellants Michael R. Lange and Sky
Robotics, Inc., opposed.
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Gunn v.
Minton, 568 U.S. ___, 133 S.Ct. 1059 (2013), we conclude
that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the mal-
practice claims at issue. We vacate the district court’s
decision and remand to the district court. On remand the
district court shall dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint for
lack of jurisdiction.
FOR THE COURT
March 27, 2013 /s/ Jan Horbaly
Date Jan Horbaly
Clerk
cc: Paul A. Sortland, Esq.
Charles E. Lundberg, Esq.