Adaeze Nwosu v. Magdalit Bolduc, Luc Vaillant, the Archdiocese of Denver, the Catholic Community of…

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.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: 1 Filed: 02/13/2026

-- 1 of 3 --

NWOSU v. BOLDUC 2
PER CURIAM.
O R D E R
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: 2 Filed: 02/13/2026

-- 2 of 3 --

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.
February 13, 2026
Date
FOR THE COURT
Case: 26-1032 Document: 9 Page: 3 Filed: 02/13/2026

-- 3 of 3 --