Acufloor v. Eventile & Forpac: Federal Circuit Vacates Tile Leveling Patent Ruling
Acufloor LLC brought a multi-patent infringement action against Eventile Inc. and Forpac LLC covering tile leveling and alignment devices and wedges. After 744 days of appellate proceedings, the Federal Circuit vacated the lower court decision and remanded, sending the dispute back for reconsideration across six asserted patents.
Federal Circuit wipes the slate: a six-patent tile installation dispute remanded
Acufloor LLC, holder of six patents spanning utility and design rights in tile leveling and alignment technology, filed this infringement action against Eventile Inc. and Forpac LLC. The asserted patents — including USD870527S, US10704271B2, US10501947B2, USD832680S, US10513857B2, and US10704274B2 — cover both the mechanical device used to level and align tiles during installation and the wedge component integral to that system. The appeal was docketed at the Federal Circuit on 15 May 2023.
The Federal Circuit closed the case on 28 May 2025 with a terse but consequential order: VACATED AND REMANDED. This outcome means the court found reversible error in the proceedings below — sufficient to nullify the prior ruling entirely — but stopped short of directing final judgment for either party. The matter now returns to the originating forum for reconsideration consistent with the Federal Circuit’s guidance.
A 744-day appellate timeline is consistent with contested multi-patent cases at the Federal Circuit and suggests substantive briefing rather than a quick procedural resolution. The precise ground for vacatur — whether claim construction, summary judgment error, or another legal defect — is not detailed in the publicly available termination record, leaving the ultimate patent validity and infringement questions unresolved. Both parties face continued litigation risk until the remand proceedings conclude.
Filing to Vacated and Remanded in 744 days
744 days from filing to close — above the median for Federal Circuit patent appeals
Federal Circuit vacates: what the remand means for both parties
Vacated and remanded: the lower decision is nullified
A Federal Circuit vacatur means the court identified a legal error serious enough to void the decision below — the prior ruling has no precedential or binding effect on the parties. Remand instructs the originating court to reconsider the dispute, typically under corrected legal standards. Neither party has won or lost on the merits; the case restarts at the trial or district level with the Federal Circuit’s instructions as a guide.
Lower ruling has no effectAcufloor gets a second chance — but nothing is decided
For Acufloor, vacatur is neither a win nor a loss. If the decision below was adverse to the patentee, vacatur removes that adverse ruling and reopens the infringement and validity questions. Acufloor retains all six asserted patents and can re-prosecute its claims on remand. However, continued litigation costs and timeline uncertainty are significant — the dispute remains unresolved more than two years after the Federal Circuit appeal was filed.
Claims preserved, not vindicatedEventile and Forpac face renewed exposure on remand
For Eventile and Forpac, vacatur eliminates any favorable ruling they may have secured below. The defendants must now re-engage in the remanded proceedings without the benefit of a prior win standing in their favor. Their invalidity and non-infringement arguments remain available but must be re-litigated. The multi-patent scope of this case — six patents, including design patents — means the evidentiary and claim construction burden on remand will be substantial.
Prior win (if any) nullifiedTile leveling IP remains live: sector uncertainty persists
With six patents covering both the functional device and its wedge component still actively in dispute, competitors in the tile installation hardware market face continuing uncertainty. Vacatur without final judgment means Acufloor’s patent portfolio retains full enforcement potential. Manufacturers and distributors of tile leveling systems should treat this outcome as a signal that freedom-to-operate in this product category has not been cleared, and that a final merits ruling may still be years away.
FTO not clearedFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Acufloor, LLC | Company | Tile installation technology innovator — holder of USD870527S and five further patentsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | EVENTILE, INC. | Company | Eventile Inc. and Forpac LLC — manufacturers/distributors of tile installation productsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Forpac, LLC | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Adam Lloyd Erickson | Attorney | Counsel for Acufloor, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Angela M. Oliver | Attorney | Counsel for Acufloor, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Caroline W. Fox | Attorney | Counsel for Acufloor, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Debra Janece McComas | Attorney | Counsel for Acufloor, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | John Russell Emerson | Attorney | Counsel for Acufloor, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Haynes & Boone, LLP | Law Firm | Representing Acufloor, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Perry S. Clegg | Attorney | Counsel for EVENTILE, INC.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Robert Manhas | Attorney | Counsel for EVENTILE, INC.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Johnson & Martin PA | Law Firm | Representing EVENTILE, INC.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP | Law Firm | Representing EVENTILE, INC.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The Federal Circuit’s order — ‘VACATED AND REMANDED’ — is a complete nullification of the proceedings below, not a merits affirmance or reversal. At the appellate level, vacatur typically indicates the court identified a reversible legal error, such as an incorrect claim construction standard or flawed application of the infringement analysis framework, without being in a position to direct final judgment. The remand instruction requires the lower tribunal to reconsider the dispute under corrected legal guidance. For both Acufloor and the defendants, this outcome resets the litigation posture: no party holds a judicially confirmed win, and the six asserted patents remain in active contention.
USD870527S and 5 patents — tile leveling and alignment device technology
The six asserted patents span both utility and ornamental design rights in tile leveling and alignment technology. The utility patents — US10704271B2, US10501947B2, US10513857B2, and US10704274B2 — protect the functional architecture of devices used to level and align tiles during installation, including the wedge mechanism that creates uniform grout joints and flat surfaces. The design patents USD870527S and USD832680S protect the ornamental appearance of these products, giving Acufloor layered protection across both function and form.
For the tile installation hardware sector, this portfolio represents a strategically layered enforcement position: utility patents address how the leveling mechanism works, while design patents address how it looks. Competitors cannot easily design around one layer without potentially implicating the other. Given the volume of private-label and OEM tile leveling products on the market, the breadth of this portfolio — and its active Federal Circuit appeal history — makes it a material risk factor for any company manufacturing, importing, or distributing tile leveling systems.
Should you run an FTO against USD870527S and the Acufloor tile leveling patents?
Any manufacturer, importer, or distributor of tile leveling systems, wedge-type alignment devices, or similar tile installation hardware should treat this case as a trigger for a formal freedom-to-operate review. The Federal Circuit vacatur means the validity and infringement questions across all six patents remain judicially open. A prior clearance opinion based on the now-vacated lower court ruling should be revisited. The design patent dimension adds particular complexity — ornamental similarity analysis requires visual claim mapping that goes beyond standard utility patent FTO methodology.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map your product’s features against the claims of US10704271B2, US10501947B2, US10513857B2, US10704274B2, USD870527S, and USD832680S simultaneously, flagging claim overlap and identifying prior art that may support invalidity arguments. Eureka’s litigation monitoring tools also allow your team to track the remand docket in real time, so you receive alerts when the lower court issues new rulings that affect the enforceability landscape for this patent family.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on USD870527S to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar Federal Circuit patent appeals in tile and construction hardware
Explore Federal Circuit appeals involving tile installation, construction hardware design patents, and multi-patent infringement actions with vacatur or remand outcomes.
What this case signals for the tile installation hardware IP landscape
A Federal Circuit vacatur across six patents keeps infringement exposure alive and raises the stakes for the entire tile leveling device sector.
Six-patent scope makes this a high-complexity remand
With both utility and design patents in play — covering the device and its wedge — the remand proceedings will likely require fresh claim construction and infringement analysis across multiple patent families. Companies in the tile installation tools market should monitor the remand docket closely for claim scope rulings that could affect their own product lines.
Vacatur signals potential claim construction or procedural error below
Federal Circuit vacaturs in patent cases typically indicate an error in claim construction, summary judgment standards, or jury instruction. While the specific basis is not public, the outcome suggests the lower court’s legal framework was flawed. Any company relying on the prior ruling to assess its FTO position should revisit that analysis given the nullification.
Acufloor v EVENTILE — key questions answered
The Federal Circuit’s VACATED AND REMANDED order nullifies the lower court ruling entirely and returns the case for reconsideration. Neither party holds a confirmed win. All six asserted patents — including both utility and design patents covering tile leveling devices and wedges — remain in active dispute pending the remand proceedings.
Acufloor asserted six patents: design patents USD870527S and USD832680S covering the ornamental appearance of its tile leveling products, and utility patents US10704271B2, US10501947B2, US10513857B2, and US10704274B2 covering the functional architecture of tile leveling and alignment devices and their wedge components.
The dispute centers on tile leveling and alignment devices — tools used during tile installation to ensure uniform grout joints and flat surfaces — and the wedge components that form part of those systems. Both the mechanical function and the ornamental design of these products are covered by Acufloor’s asserted patent portfolio.
The public record identifies Forpac LLC as an additional defendant, with the product scope including a ‘Wedge for tile installation device.’ This suggests Forpac’s potential involvement relates specifically to the wedge component covered by certain asserted patents. On remand, its liability may be assessed independently from Eventile’s under those specific patent claims.
No — a vacatur does not invalidate the patents themselves. Acufloor retains all six patents and their full enforcement rights. The vacatur removes the prior judicial ruling, meaning infringement and validity have not been finally adjudicated. Acufloor can continue to assert these patents in the remanded proceedings and in any future enforcement actions.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.