Federal Circuit IP
Micron Technology, Inc. v. Longhorn IP LLC CAFC Nos. 2023-2007, 2023-2095, decided Dec. 18, 2025 (Lourie, Schall, Stoll) Issues: Whether state bad faith patent assertion statute preempted by federal law; whether district court abused its discretion in imposing $8M bond. Overview: District court bond orders under state bad faith patent assertion statutes are not immediately appealable as interlocutory orders. Background Idaho’s Bad Faith Assertions of Patent Infringement […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
Ethanol Boosting Systems, LLC v. Ford Motor Company CAFC Nos. 2024-1381, 2024-1382, 2024-1383, decided Dec. 23, 2025 (Chen, Clevenger, Hughes) Issue: Whether the Board exceeded its statutory authority by “staying” a rehearing petition for fifteen months before granting institution. Overview: Section 314(d) bars challenges to Board institution decisions even when framed as attacks on alleged procedural ultra vires acts like delayed reconsideration rulings. Background MIT/EBS own […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
In re Gesture Technology Partners, LLC CAFC 2025-1075, decided Dec. 1, 2025 (Lourie, Bryson, and Chen) Issues: Whether IPR estoppel applies to ongoing ex parte reexaminations (EPRs) and requires their termination; whether the Board has jurisdiction over expired patents in EPR. Overview: IPR estoppel does not prevent the Patent Office from maintaining EPRs requested by IPR petitioner, and the Board retains jurisdiction over expired patents. Background Samsung requested EPR of Gesture’s ’431 patent relating to gesture-based computer sensing technology, which the Patent Office granted. Two […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
EscapeX IP, LLC v. Google LLC Case No. 2024-1201, Decided November 25, 2025 Panel: Taranto, Stoll, Stark (opinion by Stark) Overview: The Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s award of attorneys’ fees to Google under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927, and its denial of EscapeX’s motion to amend judgment under Rule 59(e). The […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. MediaPointe, Inc. Case No. 24-1571, Decided November 25, 2025 Panel: Taranto, Stoll, Cunningham Overview: The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment that certain claims of two patents directed to intelligent distribution networks for streaming media were invalid for indefiniteness and that remaining claims were not infringed. The decision clarifies the […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
Canatex Completion Solutions, Inc. v. Wellmatics, LLC Case No. 2024-1466, Decided November 12, 2025 Panel: Moore, Prost, Taranto (opinion by Taranto) Overview: The Federal Circuit reversed a district court ruling that invalidated claims of Canatex’s patent for indefiniteness. The decision clarifies the standard for judicial correction of claim language errors and confirms that courts may correct obvious clerical mistakes when […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
Three Mandamus Petitions Denied (Nov. 6, 2025) Cases: In re Motorola Solutions, Inc., No. 2025-134 (precedential) In re Google LLC, No. 2025-144 (non-precedential) In re SAP America, Inc., No. 2025-132 (non-precedential) Background: Motorola: Most severe impact—eight IPRs initially instituted were later deinstituted. Google & Samsung: Challenged denials despite Samsung’s Sotera stipulation. SAP: Similarly challenged discretionary denials after making […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
Focus Prods. Grp. Int’l, LLC v. Kartri Sales Co., No. 2023-1446, 2025 WL 2774853 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 30, 2025) ( Moore, Clevenger, and Chen) Issue 1: Whether the district court erred in its infringement determination by failing to recognize that the patentee made a clear and unmistakable prosecution history disclaimer excluding embodiments having a flat upper edge when responding to the examiner’s restriction […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp., No. 2024-1145, 2025 WL 2999367 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 27, 2025) (Reyna, Prost, and Chen) Issues: Whether the district court correctly construed the “outer frame” recited in the claims as a “self-expanding outer frame,” and whether Aortic’s judicial estoppel argument was forfeited. Facts / Procedural Posture: Aortic asserted four patents related to transcatheter aortic valve devices, each claiming a valve […]
Read More
Federal Circuit IP
Rex Medical, L.P. v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., No. 2024-1072, 2025 WL 2799030 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 2, 2025) (Stoll, J., Dyk, J., Prost, J.) Issue: At issue was whether the expert properly apportioned value from a multi-patent license and whether the district court erred in denying JMOL of noninfringement and invalidity. Facts/Procedural Posture: Rex sued Intuitive […]
Read More
