Back to Blog
CAFC-PTOMay 14, 2026·25-1306·Affirmed.

Spero v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Holding

The Federal Circuit summarily affirmed, under Fed. Cir. R. 36, the PTAB decisions in three consolidated inter partes reviews (IPR2023-01034, -01039, -01040), leaving the Board's outcomes undisturbed. The judgment gives no reasoning and does not state what the Board decided.

Why It Matters

The Rule 36 judgment leaves the Board's IPR outcomes undisturbed, but it gives no reasoning, so counsel gain no guidance on the underlying issues.

Full Summary

Spero v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC The Federal Circuit summarily affirmed, under Fed. Cir. R. 36, the PTAB decisions in three consolidated inter partes reviews (IPR2023-01034, -01039, -01040), leaving the Board's outcomes undisturbed. The judgment gives no reasoning and does not state what the Board decided. The Rule 36 judgment leaves the Board's IPR outcomes undisturbed, but it gives no reasoning, so counsel gain no guidance on the underlying issues. Affirmed. Yechezkal Evan Spero appealed from three PTAB inter partes review decisions (IPR2023-01034, IPR2023-01039, IPR2023-01040), with Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC as appellee. The appeals (Nos. 2025-1306, 2025-1307, 2025-1473) were argued, and a panel of Chief Judge Moore and Judges Prost and Cunningham decided them. The court held the PTAB decisions affirmed, per curiam under Federal Circuit Rule 36, without opinion. The judgment does not identify the patents, the challenged claims, the Board's grounds or the issues raised, so the reasoning behind the affirmance is not stated. The disposition is nonprecedential and carries little weight beyond these parties. Rule 36 affirmance non-precedential

Key Points

  • Yechezkal Evan Spero appealed from three PTAB inter partes review decisions (IPR2023-01034, IPR2023-01039, IPR2023-01040), with Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC as appellee.
  • The appeals (Nos. 2025-1306, 2025-1307, 2025-1473) were argued, and a panel of Chief Judge Moore and Judges Prost and Cunningham decided them.
  • The court held the PTAB decisions affirmed, per curiam under Federal Circuit Rule 36, without opinion.
  • The judgment does not identify the patents, the challenged claims, the Board's grounds or the issues raised, so the reasoning behind the affirmance is not stated.
  • The disposition is nonprecedential and carries little weight beyond these parties.
Rule 36 affirmancenon-precedential

More on this topic