This morning, the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion and six nonprecedential orders. The opinion comes in an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. One of the orders is a denial of a petition for writ of mandamus, one remands a case pursuant to an agreement between the parties, one transfers an appeal, and three are dismissals. Here is the introduction to the opinion and orders other than the dismissals, along with links to the dismissals.
Rideshare Displays, Inc. v. Squires (Nonprecedential)
Rideshare Displays, Inc. appeals five decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board determining that claims 1–9 and 11–20 of U.S. Patent No. 9,892,637; claims 1, 2, 4, and 6–8 of U.S. Patent No. 10,169,987; claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,395,525; claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 10,599,199; and claims 1–5 of U.S. Patent No. 10,748,417 are unpatentable for obviousness. Lyft, Inc. cross-appeals the Board’s partial grant of Rideshare’s motions to amend claims 29, 31, and 32 of the ’637 patent and claims 1 and 4 of the ’199 patent. For the lead appeal, we affirm the Board’s holding that all challenged claims are unpatentable. For the cross-appeal, we reverse the Board’s partial grant of the motions to amend.
In re Khan (Nonprecedential Order)
This court previously affirmed final judgments against Nazir Khan and Iftikhar Khan on their claims of patent infringement. The Khans now petition this court for a writ of mandamus seeking various relief, including to declare “all dispositive rulings issued” in the cases “void” and to “[a]knowledge and confirm that all facts and legal arguments presented by Petitioners are correct in law and supported by the uncontested record.” Pets. at 9–10 (emphasis omitted).
Exeltis USA, Inc. v. Lupin Ltd. (Nonprecedential Order)
The parties notify the court that they have executed a settlement agreement resolving all claims and move at ECF Nos. 23 and 24 for dismissal of this appeal and remand to the district court to amend the judgment consistent with its August 29, 2025 indicative ruling.
Warren v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. (Nonprecedential Order)
Brian A. Warren filed a complaint at the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan against various media companies for trademark and copyright infringement and breach of contract. On June 2, 2025, the district court dismissed Mr. Warren’s complaint and entered judgment. Mr. Warren filed a notice of appeal at the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit seeking review by that court. The Sixth Circuit transmitted the notice to the district court for docketing, Fed. R. App. P. 4(d), which then transmitted it to this court.