The Technology & Information Law Blog

Analysis by Charles Gideon Korrell

  • Micron v. Longhorn IP: When an $8 Million Bond Isn’t Appealable (Yet)

    ·

    The Federal Circuit’s December 18, 2025 decision in Micron Technology, Inc. v. Longhorn IP LLC is a reminder that not every high-stakes procedural ruling is immediately appealable, even when it carries an eight-figure price tag and raises substantial federal preemption questions. In dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, the court sidestepped the merits entirely,…

    Continue reading →


  • Wonderland Switzerland v. Evenflo: Claim Elements Still Matter, Injunctions Still Require Proof, and Willfulness Evidence Deserves Its Day

    ·

    The Federal Circuit’s decision in Wonderland Switzerland AG v. Evenflo Company, Inc. (Dec. 17, 2025) delivers a sweeping reset across several familiar but frequently contested areas of patent law: doctrine of equivalents limits, claim construction discipline, permanent injunction standards, and the evidentiary threshold for willfulness. The court affirmed much of the jury’s infringement verdict, but…

    Continue reading →


  • Game Plan v. Uninterrupted IP: Assignments During Litigation Can Still Win Priority—If the Goodwill Comes Along

    ·

    The Federal Circuit’s decision in Game Plan, Inc. v. Uninterrupted IP, LLC, Appeal No. 2024-1407 (Dec. 10, 2025), offers a pointed reminder that trademark priority disputes often turn less on lofty equitable arguments and more on procedural discipline and the fundamentals of goodwill transfer. The court affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s cancellation of…

    Continue reading →


  • In re Bayou Grande Coffee Roasting Co.: When a Beverage Name Is Neither Generic Nor Descriptive

    ·

    On December 9, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a sharp rebuke to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s refusal to register the mark KAHWA for café and coffee shop services. In In re Bayou Grande Coffee Roasting Co., No. 2024-1118 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 9, 2025), the court reversed the Board’s findings of genericness and mere…

    Continue reading →


  • IBM v. Zillow: When “Discloses” Still Means Discloses in IPR Practice

    ·

    On December 9, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in International Business Machines Corp. v. Zillow Group, Inc., affirming a split Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision that invalidated some claims of IBM’s single sign-on patent while preserving others. The opinion offers a careful, almost tutorial-like, explanation of how far the Board may…

    Continue reading →


  • Coda Development v. Goodyear Tire: When Trade Secrets Collapse Under the Weight of Overbreadth

    ·

    On December 8, 2025, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Northern District of Ohio’s judgment as a matter of law wiping out a $64 million jury verdict in Coda Development s.r.o. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., No. 23-1880 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 8, 2025). The court concluded that no reasonable jury could have found Goodyear liable…

    Continue reading →


  • Adnexus v. Meta: When Claim Construction Masquerades as Plausibility at the Pleadings Stage

    ·

    On December 5, 2025, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the dismissal of Adnexus Inc.’s v. Meta Platforms, Inc., holding that the district court prematurely resolved a claim construction dispute under the guise of Rule 12(b)(6) plausibility. The decision is a pointed reminder that, while courts retain flexibility at the pleadings stage, they may not…

    Continue reading →


  • Seagen v. Daiichi Sankyo Co.: When Written Description Becomes a Question of Law

    ·

    The Federal Circuit’s December 2, 2025 decision in Seagen Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo Co., No. 23-2424, continues a noticeable and consequential trend: the court’s growing willingness to overturn jury verdicts on written description and enablement grounds as a matter of law. In reversing a $41 million verdict and vacating findings of willful infringement, the panel…

    Continue reading →


  • In re Gesture Technology: IPR Estoppel Stops at the PTAB Door, Not Ex Parte Reexamination

    ·

    The Federal Circuit’s December 1, 2025 decision in In re Gesture Technology Partners, LLC, Appeal No. 2025-1075, delivers a clean and consequential message on two recurring pressure points in post-grant practice: the reach of inter partes review (IPR) estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1), and the Patent Office’s authority to continue adjudicating validity in ex…

    Continue reading →


  • Akamai v. MediaPointe: “Best” and “Optimal” Still Demand Objective Boundaries

    ·

    The Federal Circuit’s decision in Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. MediaPointe, Inc., No. 2024-1571 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 25, 2025), reinforces a familiar but still unforgiving rule of patent law: terms of degree such as “best” and “optimal” require objective boundaries anchored in the intrinsic record, not intuition, common sense, or counsel’s assurances that “it all tends…

    Continue reading →