CAFC-PTOJuly 9, 2026·25-1410·Affirmed.
In re GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Holding
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB. The Rule 36 judgment provides no reasoning or substantive discussion of the patentability issues.
Why It Matters
This is a reminder that a PTAB loss can be affirmed without written analysis, leaving the Board’s decision as the only source for the substantive reasoning.
Full Summary
In re GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB. The Rule 36 judgment provides no reasoning or substantive discussion of the patentability issues.
This is a reminder that a PTAB loss can be affirmed without written analysis, leaving the Board’s decision as the only source for the substantive reasoning.
Affirmed.
The appeal came from the PTAB in PTO No. 16/237,637.
The Federal Circuit disposed of the appeal by nonprecedential Rule 36 judgment.
No claim construction, patentability, or other merits analysis appears in the judgment.
The PTAB decision was affirmed in full, but the extracted text does not identify the underlying grounds.
Rule 36 affirmance non-precedential claim construction
Rule 36 affirmance non-precedential claim construction
Rule 36 affirmance non-precedential
Key Points
- The appeal came from the PTAB in PTO No. 16/237,637.
- The Federal Circuit disposed of the appeal by nonprecedential Rule 36 judgment.
- No claim construction, patentability, or other merits analysis appears in the judgment.
- The PTAB decision was affirmed in full, but the extracted text does not identify the underlying grounds.
How this summary was made: Drafted with AI from the court's opinion or order. Read the document itself before relying on the summary. Editorial policy
New to Federal Circuit? See our Federal Circuit page