AGI SureTrack v. Farmers Edge: Federal Circuit Affirms-in-Part, Vacates-in-Part
AGI SureTrack LLC appealed against Farmers Edge, Inc. and Farmers Edge (US) Inc. over eight patents covering precision agriculture connectivity technology embodied in the CanPlug device. The Federal Circuit issued a split ruling — affirming some issues, vacating others, and remanding — across a case that ran 769 days.
Eight-patent precision ag dispute reaches a split Federal Circuit ruling
AGI SureTrack LLC brought an infringement action against Farmers Edge, Inc. and its US subsidiary asserting eight granted US patents — US11507899B2, US10963825B2, US11151485B2, US11361260B2, US11107017B2, US11361261B2, US11126937B2, and US11164116B2 — all directed to precision agriculture technology. The accused product is the CanPlug device. The appeal was filed at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on 24 April 2024 under case number 24-1730.
The recorded basis of termination is 'Appeal Dismissed in Part.' The Federal Circuit's docket order, however, states the disposition as 'AFFIRMED-IN-PART, VACATED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED.' These characterisations are reported as-is from the available record; the reader should consider both independently. The specific terms and scope of each component of the ruling are not further detailed in the publicly available record.
The case ran 769 days from filing to close — a duration consistent with a complex multi-patent Federal Circuit appeal. The eight-patent portfolio and split dispositional language suggest that the underlying district court proceedings involved multiple distinct claim sets or issues, some of which survived appellate scrutiny and some of which did not. What drove the partial vacation and what issues were remanded are not disclosed in the available record.
See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →Filing to Appeal Dismissed in Part in 769 days
769 days from filing to close — a substantial appellate timeline for an eight-patent precision ag dispute
US11507899B2 and seven related patents — precision agriculture connectivity
Any company developing or selling precision agriculture connectivity hardware — particularly devices that interface with farm equipment to collect, transmit, or analyse field data — should assess exposure against the AGI SureTrack patent family. The CanPlug device is the accused product in this case, but the claim scope of eight related patents may extend to a broad range of agricultural telematics and data management products. The Federal Circuit's partial affirmance confirms that at least some claims survived appellate challenge.
Official order — verbatim text
The Federal Circuit's disposition — 'AFFIRMED-IN-PART, VACATED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED' — indicates that the panel reviewed the lower proceedings under applicable standards of review and reached different conclusions on distinct issues. The partial affirmance signals that certain rulings below were upheld; the partial vacatur indicates reversible error was found on other issues, nullifying those determinations; and the remand directs the lower tribunal to address the vacated matters anew. The recorded basis of termination separately characterises the case as 'Appeal Dismissed in Part,' which the reader should treat as a parallel data point from the docket record.
Federal Circuit's split ruling: what affirmed-in-part and vacated-in-part means for both parties
What 'affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part, remanded' means
A split Federal Circuit disposition means the court found no reversible error on certain issues below — affirming those — while identifying reversible error on others, nullifying those portions of the lower decision. The remand sends the vacated issues back to the lower tribunal for further proceedings consistent with the appellate ruling. No single party achieved a clean win or loss.
Split appellate dispositionAGI SureTrack: partial win, with remanded issues still live
The affirmance of certain portions supports AGI SureTrack's position on those specific issues, meaning the lower tribunal's rulings in its favour on those points stand. However, the vacation of other portions removes previous findings that may have benefited the patent holder, and the remand keeps the dispute active on the vacated issues. The portfolio of eight precision agriculture patents remains in play to the extent of the remanded matters.
Partial affirmance for patent holderFarmers Edge: partial relief, but litigation continues on remand
Farmers Edge secured a vacatur of certain lower-court findings, which is a meaningful appellate win — those rulings can no longer be enforced as entered. However, the affirmance of other portions means Farmers Edge did not escape all adverse findings below. The remand creates continued exposure on the vacated issues, and the CanPlug device remains the subject of ongoing proceedings.
Partial vacatur for defendantPrecision ag IP enforcement: split rulings raise uncertainty
A split Federal Circuit disposition across an eight-patent precision agriculture portfolio signals that patent scope and claim validity in this technology domain are genuinely contested at the highest appellate level. Companies operating CanPlug-style agricultural connectivity devices face continued monitoring obligations while remanded issues are resolved. The outcome raises the bar for clearance opinions in the precision ag connectivity space.
Elevated IP risk — precision agFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | AGI SURETRACK LLC | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Farmers Edge, Inc. | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Farmers Edge (US) Inc. | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jonathan Stuart Kagan | Attorney | Counsel for AGI SURETRACK LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Lucas Oxenford | Attorney | Counsel for AGI SURETRACK LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Morgan Chu | Attorney | Counsel for AGI SURETRACK LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Irell & Manella, LLP | Law Firm | Representing AGI SURETRACK LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Cole Thomas Tipton | Attorney | Counsel for Farmers Edge, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Nathan S. Mammen | Attorney | Counsel for Farmers Edge, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP | Law Firm | Representing Farmers Edge, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitSearch in Eureka ↗ |
R&D signals in the precision agriculture connectivity space
This Federal Circuit dispute between AGI SureTrack and Farmers Edge surfaces forward-looking patent intelligence across precision agriculture data, connectivity hardware, and field analytics.
AGI SureTrack's precision ag filing activity signals continued expansion
AGI SureTrack's assertion of eight granted patents — spanning multiple application years — suggests an active prosecution strategy in agricultural data connectivity. Monitoring SureTrack's pending applications and continuation filings may reveal the next wave of enforcement targets in precision agriculture telematics and field data platforms.
Active portfolio expansionPrecision ag connectivity patents: a crowded and contested landscape
The CanPlug device sits at the intersection of agricultural telematics, CAN bus connectivity, and cloud-based field data management — a domain attracting heavy patent filing activity from OEMs, agri-tech startups, and platform providers. Understanding claim density in this space is essential for any team developing agricultural hardware or farm management software.
High claim density — ag connectivityFarmers Edge's own patent activity in precision agriculture
Farmers Edge operates at the intersection of satellite-based field analytics, agronomy AI, and hardware connectivity. Examining their patent portfolio and publication activity reveals where they are investing in proprietary technology — and where their defensive IP may support design-around arguments or cross-licensing positions in future disputes.
Defensive portfolio — ag analyticsAdjacent R&D opportunities near the asserted patent family
The eight-patent SureTrack family focuses on data connectivity and management for agricultural equipment. Adjacent white-space areas — including edge-computing architectures for in-field devices, interoperability protocols between OEM equipment and third-party platforms, and AI-driven crop analytics — may offer R&D pathways with lower existing claim density and reduced litigation exposure.
White space — ag edge computingSimilar Federal Circuit patent appeals in precision agriculture technology
Explore related infringement appeals before the Federal Circuit involving precision agriculture data, connectivity hardware, and agricultural equipment telematics patents.
What this case signals for the precision agriculture IP landscape
A split Federal Circuit ruling across eight patents in precision ag connectivity has material implications for portfolio owners, product developers, and competitors alike.
Eight-patent assertion portfolios demand granular claim mapping
When a plaintiff asserts eight related patents, Federal Circuit outcomes often fragment across claim families. Companies facing multi-patent precision ag assertions should map exposure patent-by-patent — a blanket clearance posture is unlikely to survive a split ruling. Granular FTO analysis is essential before product launch.
Partial vacaturs keep CanPlug-type device makers in litigation limbo
A remand does not end the dispute. Farmers Edge faces continued proceedings on the vacated issues. Any company deploying precision agriculture connectivity hardware similar to the CanPlug should monitor the remand proceedings closely, as the final scope of liability remains unresolved at Federal Circuit close.
AGI v Farmers — key questions answered
The Federal Circuit issued a split disposition: affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part, and remanded. The recorded basis of termination also characterises the case as 'Appeal Dismissed in Part.' The specific issues affirmed, vacated, or remanded are not further detailed in the publicly available record.
AGI SureTrack asserted eight US patents: US11507899B2, US10963825B2, US11151485B2, US11361260B2, US11107017B2, US11361261B2, US11126937B2, and US11164116B2 — all directed to precision agriculture technology and asserted against the Farmers Edge CanPlug device.
The CanPlug device is the accused product in this infringement action brought by AGI SureTrack. It is a Farmers Edge precision agriculture connectivity product. The specific technical features alleged to infringe the eight asserted patents are not detailed in the publicly available appellate record.
A split Federal Circuit disposition means some lower-court findings were upheld (affirmed) and others were nullified (vacated). The remand directs the lower tribunal to address the vacated issues further. Neither party achieved a complete appellate win, and the litigation remains active on the remanded matters.
The appeal was filed on 24 April 2024 and closed on 2 June 2026, a duration of 769 days — consistent with a complex multi-patent Federal Circuit appeal involving eight patents across a precision agriculture infringement action.
This page is compiled from public court dockets and third-party patent and litigation data via PatSnap Eureka, and is provided for general informational purposes only. The information shown — including party names, patent and application numbers, dates, case status, outcomes, and any analysis — may be incomplete, may not reflect the most recent filings or legal status, and may contain errors or omissions. Verify all details against official court records (for example, PACER) and the relevant patent office before relying on them.
Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice or a legal opinion on the validity, infringement, enforceability, or scope of any patent or case, and no attorney‑client relationship is created by its use. Any description of an outcome (such as a dismissal, settlement, or consent judgment) is a general summary, not a legal determination. All patents, trademarks, and company or law‑firm names are the property of their respective owners. PatSnap makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this content and disclaims, to the fullest extent permitted by law, all liability for reliance on it. For advice on a specific matter, consult qualified legal counsel.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.