What Can You Use as Precedent when a District Court Sits As a Court of Federal Claims

[Taurus]

I have a question concerning a case that I am working on pro se. I filed under the Little Tucker act at the District Court. One of my claims involves an interpretation of Federal Law, which there is a huge Circuit split over. The 7th Circuit (were I filed) precedent is adverse to mine. But if they are sitting as a Court of Federal Claims pursuant to the Little Tucker Act, is that District Court bounded by the Regional Circuit's precedent?

The Federal Circuit itself has not confronted the interpretation of that particular issue. So I am asking a District Court in the 7th Circuit to ignore that Circuit Precedent and adopt the (majority - in other Circuits: 9th 4th, 6th and 1st) view on the theory that it is sitting as a court of Federal Claims (the Federal Circuit has Jurisdiction of the appeal).

I have uncovered some case law that a District Court should follow the Federal Circuit, but none to suggest that it is completely free of it's Regional Precedent.

I posted here because a Federal practitioner of tax or patent law should know the answer.

[Mr. Knowitall]

From what you appear to be saying, the precedent at issue is not directly related to a Court of Claims issue or an issue over which the Federal Circuit either has jurisdiction or has previously ruled, so I would expect your court to find itself bound to the precedent set in the appellate courts of your circuit.

[Taurus]

Thank you. The Federal Circuit actually does have appellate jurisdiction over claims under $10,000. Those cases can be filed in the Regional District Court (i.e. the Northern District of Illinois) but the Federal Circuit retains jurisdiction - usually.

You are correct that the Federal Circuit has not itself defined "unauthorized access" under the CFAA.

[Mr. Knowitall]

You aren't following. I was not speaking of jurisdiction to file an appeal. I was speaking of the subject matter.