The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions finding numerous patent claims held by Eagle View Technologies unpatentable, dealing a setback to the aerial imaging company in its dispute with competitor Nearmap US.
In a nonprecedential decision issued February 3, 2026, a three-judge panel led by Circuit Judge Chen upheld the board's findings that claims in two Eagle View patents failed to meet patentability standards under 35 U.S.C. § 103, which requires inventions to be non-obvious.
The case consolidated appeals from two inter partes review proceedings initiated by Nearmap US against Eagle View's patents. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board had ruled in December 2023 and January 2024 that specific claims in U.S. Patent No. 8,670,961 and U.S. Patent No. 8,078,436 were unpatentable as obvious.
For the '961 patent, the board found claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 21-22, 24-25, 27, and 29 unpatentable. The '436 patent saw even broader invalidation, with claims 1-42 and 46-66 ruled unpatentable by the board.
Eagle View Technologies, represented by attorneys from Haynes and Boone LLP including Laura Vu who argued before the Federal Circuit, challenged both board decisions. The company's legal team also included attorneys from Dallas, Plano, and Washington D.C. offices.
Nearmap US defended the board's rulings through counsel from Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP, with Megan Freeland Raymond arguing for the appellee. The company's legal representation extended across multiple offices including New York and Washington D.C., with additional counsel from Fish & Richardson PC.
The Federal Circuit panel, consisting of Chief Judge Moore and Circuit Judges Chen and Stark, heard arguments in the consolidated appeals numbered 2024-1488 and 2024-1549. The cases originated from Patent Trial and Appeal Board proceedings IPR2022-01009 and IPR2022-01090.
Inter partes review represents a post-grant proceeding that allows third parties to challenge patent validity before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. These proceedings have become increasingly common as an alternative to federal court litigation for resolving patent disputes, often providing a faster and less expensive forum for determining patent validity.
The patents at issue appear to relate to aerial imaging technology, an area where both Eagle View Technologies and Nearmap US operate. Nearmap is known for providing high-resolution aerial imagery and location data, while Eagle View specializes in aerial imaging services for various industries.
Patent disputes in the aerial imaging sector often involve questions of obviousness under Section 103 of the Patent Act, which requires that claimed inventions represent a non-obvious advance over existing technology. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board's obviousness analysis typically examines whether the claimed invention would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
The Federal Circuit's affirmance of the board's decisions means Eagle View cannot enforce the invalidated claims against Nearmap or other potential infringers. This outcome may impact competitive dynamics in the aerial imaging market, potentially allowing broader use of technologies covered by the now-invalidated claims.
Because the Federal Circuit designated its decision as nonprecedential, the ruling will not establish binding precedent for future cases. However, nonprecedential decisions can still provide guidance on how courts might approach similar fact patterns or legal issues.
The consolidated appeals reflect the complex nature of modern patent disputes, where multiple patents and numerous claims often require simultaneous adjudication. Patent holders frequently seek protection through multiple related patents, while challengers may initiate parallel proceedings to comprehensively address perceived patent threats.
For Eagle View Technologies, the adverse ruling represents a significant development in its intellectual property portfolio. Companies in technology sectors typically rely on patent protection to maintain competitive advantages and exclude competitors from using similar technologies.
The timing of the decision, coming in early 2026, reflects the multi-year timeline typical of patent proceedings that move from initial Patent Trial and Appeal Board proceedings through Federal Circuit appeals. The underlying inter partes review proceedings were initiated in 2022, demonstrating the extended timeframes involved in resolving complex patent disputes.
Industry observers will likely monitor whether Eagle View pursues further appellate options, though the company's choices are limited following Federal Circuit review. The Supreme Court rarely grants certiorari in patent cases absent significant legal questions or circuit splits.
The ruling adds to the growing body of Federal Circuit jurisprudence addressing patent validity challenges through inter partes review, a mechanism that has fundamentally changed how patent disputes are resolved since its introduction in the America Invents Act.