Vroom, Inc. v. Sidekick Technology, LLC

Opinion

Case: 23-1362 Document: 61 Page: 1 Filed: 01/28/2026

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

VROOM, INC., VROOM AUTOMOTIVE, LLC, dba Vroom, dba Texas Direct Auto, CARSTORY, LLC, VAST.COM, INC., dba CarStory, Plaintiffs-Appellees

v.

SIDEKICK TECHNOLOGY, LLC, Defendant-Appellant ______________________

2023-1362, 2023-1667, 2023-2041 ______________________

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in No. 2:21-cv-06737-WJM-JSA, Senior Judge William J. Martini. ______________________

ON MOTION ______________________

Before STOLL, WALLACH, and CUNNINGHAM, Circuit Judges. WALLACH, Circuit Judge. ORDER The parties filed a motion to stay these appeals while they worked to effectuate settlement and asked the district Case: 23-1362 Document: 61 Page: 2 Filed: 01/28/2026

court for an indicative ruling that it would vacate its prior patent-ineligibility decisions if this court remanded. ECF No. 57. Now that the district court has so indicated, the parties jointly move to remand these appeals for it to do so. ECF No. 60.1 We remand for the limited purpose of the district court’s consideration of the parties’ request for vacatur. See Ohio Willow Wood Co. v. Thermo-Ply, Inc., 629 F.3d 1374, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2011). In granting the motion, this court takes no position on the propriety or necessity of any vacatur, leaving it to the district court to consider the prin- ciples enunciated in United States Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership, 513 U.S. 18, 29 (1994). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) ECF No. 60 is granted to the extent that the ap- peals are remanded. (2) ECF No. 57 is denied as moot. (3) Each side shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT

January 28, 2026 Date

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: January 28, 2026

1 The motion to remand, ECF No. 60, supersedes a prior version of the motion docketed as ECF No. 58. No action will be taken on ECF No. 58.