Back to Blog
CAFC-ITCAugust 11, 2026·25-2030·Dismissed; mandate issued August 11, 2026.

Lenovo (United States) Inc. v. International Trade Commission

International Trade Commission

Holding

The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal by agreement of the parties under Rule 42(b). Each side will bear its own costs.

Why It Matters

This is a procedural termination with no merits ruling, so it does not affect substantive ITC or patent-law doctrine.

Full Summary

Lenovo (United States) Inc. v. International Trade Commission The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal by agreement of the parties under Rule 42(b). Each side will bear its own costs. This is a procedural termination with no merits ruling, so it does not affect substantive ITC or patent-law doctrine. Dismissed; mandate issued August 11, 2026. The order is expressly nonprecedential. The appeal came from ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1382. The parties agreed to dismiss the appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). The Federal Circuit dismissed the proceeding and ordered each side to bear its own costs. No patent-law merits issue—such as infringement, domestic industry, or remedy—was addressed in the order. non-precedential standing / jurisdiction domestic industry infringement non-precedential standing / jurisdiction domestic industry infringement non-precedential standing / jurisdiction

Key Points

  • The order is expressly nonprecedential.
  • The appeal came from ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1382.
  • The parties agreed to dismiss the appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b).
  • The Federal Circuit dismissed the proceeding and ordered each side to bear its own costs.
  • No patent-law merits issue—such as infringement, domestic industry, or remedy—was addressed in the order.
non-precedentialstanding / jurisdictiondomestic industryinfringement

More on this topic