11th Circuit: Rudzinskas v. Retractable Technologies Not For Publication

• The `United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit` is handling the case of `Maryann Rudzinskas v. Retractable Technologies Inc`, identified as `USCA11 Case 25-13895`.
• A document related to this case, `Document: 28-1`, was filed on `August 28, 2026`, and is ten pages long.
• The case is on the `Eleventh Circuit non-argument calendar`, meaning it will be decided without oral arguments.
• The court's opinion in this matter is designated as `NOT FOR PUBLICATION`, indicating it does not set binding legal precedent for `Appellate case law US`.

The court's opinion in this matter is designated as `NOT FOR PUBLICATION`, indicating it does not set binding legal precedent for `Appellate case law US`.

A recent filing in the `United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit` pertains to the case of `Maryann Rudzinskas v. Retractable Technologies Inc`. This appellate matter, identified as `USCA11 Case 25-13895`, involves a dispute between Maryann Rudzinskas and the corporate entity Retractable Technologies, Inc., brought before one of the federal circuit courts responsible for appeals from federal district courts in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

The specific document related to this case bears the identifier `Document: 28-1` and was officially recorded with a filing date of `August 28, 2026`. This particular filing is noted as being ten pages in length, as indicated by the `Page: 1 of 10` designation. The `Rudzinskas v. Retractable Technologies 11th Circuit` proceeding highlights the ongoing judicial process within the federal appellate system.

The case of `Maryann Rudzinskas v. Retractable Technologies Inc` has been placed on the `Non-Argument Calendar` of the Eleventh Circuit. This procedural designation indicates that the appellate court has determined the appeal can be resolved without the need for oral arguments from the parties involved. Such decisions are typically made when the legal issues are deemed straightforward, the facts are not in significant dispute, or the arguments presented in the briefs are considered sufficient for a ruling.

Placement on the `Eleventh Circuit non-argument calendar` is a common practice across federal appellate courts, serving as an efficient mechanism to manage extensive caseloads. While it streamlines the appellate process, it still involves a thorough review of all submitted briefs and records by a panel of judges, who then issue a written opinion or order to resolve the appeal.

A significant aspect of the court's action in `USCA11 Case 25-13895` is its designation as `NOT FOR PUBLICATION`. This status means that the opinion issued in the `Rudzinskas v. Retractable Technologies 11th Circuit` case does not establish binding legal precedent for future cases within the Eleventh Circuit or other jurisdictions. Unlike published opinions, which serve as authoritative `Appellate case law US` and must be followed by lower courts and subsequent panels, a `not for publication opinion US` is limited in its impact.

While this non-precedential ruling resolves the specific legal dispute between Maryann Rudzinskas and Retractable Technologies, Inc., it cannot be cited as persuasive authority in other unrelated cases. This practice allows appellate courts to efficiently address a large volume of appeals without unnecessarily expanding the body of binding legal precedent, reserving published opinions for matters that establish new legal principles or clarify existing law.

An notable detail concerning the court document in this matter is its reported filing date. The record explicitly states that `Document: 28-1` was filed on `August 28, 2026`. This date, as recorded in the official court document header, is a specific fact reported from the source material.

All details regarding the `Maryann Rudzinskas v. Retractable Technologies Inc` case, including the court, case number, document identifiers, and the precise filing date, are derived directly from the provided court record. This adherence to the documented facts ensures accurate reporting of the procedural details as presented in the official filing.

Source: Original reporting via court document header