Back to Blog
CAFC-PTOJune 9, 2026·24-2372, 24-2373·Affirmed.

Centripetal Networks, LLC v. Keysight Technologies, Inc.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Holding

The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB. The Rule 36 judgment provides no reasoning or issue-specific holdings.

Why It Matters

This is a nonprecedential Rule 36 affirmance, so it confirms the PTAB result for the parties but offers no guidance on the underlying patentability issues.

Full Summary

Centripetal Networks, LLC v. Keysight Technologies, Inc. [Rule 36 Judgment] The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB. The Rule 36 judgment provides no reasoning or issue-specific holdings. This is a nonprecedential Rule 36 affirmance, so it confirms the PTAB result for the parties but offers no guidance on the underlying patentability issues. Affirmed. The appeals arose from two PTAB IPR proceedings, IPR2023-00445 and IPR2023-01329. The Federal Circuit affirmed without opinion under Federal Circuit Rule 36. The judgment does not identify the challenged claims, patent numbers, prior-art grounds, or specific patent-law issues decided by the Board. Because there is no written opinion, the decision has limited value beyond the fact of affirmance. Rule 36 affirmance non-precedential § 102 § 103 Rule 36 affirmance non-precedential § 102 § 103 Rule 36 affirmance non-precedential

Key Points

  • The appeals arose from two PTAB IPR proceedings, IPR2023-00445 and IPR2023-01329.
  • The Federal Circuit affirmed without opinion under Federal Circuit Rule 36.
  • The judgment does not identify the challenged claims, patent numbers, prior-art grounds, or specific patent-law issues decided by the Board.
  • Because there is no written opinion, the decision has limited value beyond the fact of affirmance.
Rule 36 affirmancenon-precedential§ 102§ 103

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

More on this topic

New to Federal Circuit? See our Federal Circuit page