Fintiv, Inc. v. Apple Inc.
This text of Fintiv, Inc. v. Apple Inc. (Fintiv, Inc. v. Apple Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 24-1345 Document: 40 Page: 1 Filed: 04/30/2025
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________
FINTIV, INC., Appellant
v.
APPLE INC., Appellee ______________________
2024-1345 ______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2022- 00976. ______________________
Decided: April 30, 2025 ______________________
MEREDITH LEIGH MARTIN ADDY, AddyHart P.C., At- lanta, GA, argued for appellant. Also represented by CHARLES A. PANNELL, III; BENJAMIN CAPPEL, Chicago, IL; CAREN YUSEM, Washington DC; JECEACA AN, Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, New York, NY; MARCUS BARBER, JOHN DOWNING, DARCY L. JONES, HEATHER KIM, THUCMINH NGUYEN, JONATHAN K. WALDROP, Redwood Shores, CA.
FAN ZHANG, Ropes & Gray LLP, Washington, DC, ar- gued for appellee. Also represented by DOUGLAS Case: 24-1345 Document: 40 Page: 2 Filed: 04/30/2025
HALLWARD-DRIEMEIER; JAMES LAWRENCE DAVIS, JR., JAMES RICHARD BATCHELDER, CHRISTOPHER M. BONNY, East Palo Alto, CA; BRIAN LEBOW, CASSANDRA B. ROTH, New York, NY. ______________________
Before PROST, TARANTO, and STARK, Circuit Judges. PROST, Circuit Judge. Fintiv, Inc. (“Fintiv”) appeals a final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board holding claims 1–3 of U.S. Patent No. 9,892,386 (“the ’386 patent”) unpatenta- ble. Today we issued an opinion in related case Fintiv, Inc. v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., No. 23-2312 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 30, 2025), holding, among others, claims 1–3 of the ’386 patent invalid as indefinite. There is no dispute that our affir- mance in the related case compels dismissing as moot this appeal. See Oral Arg. at 0:27–0:40, No. 24-1345, https://oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov/default.aspx?fl= 24-1345_03032025.mp3. Accordingly, having affirmed in the related case, we dismiss as moot this appeal. DISMISSED
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Fintiv, Inc. v. Apple Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fintiv-inc-v-apple-inc-cafc-2025.