Case 22-1012: Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB Decision on Search Results Presentation Patent
In a 461-day appeal before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Board's patentability determination on US14/628093 — covering methods, systems, and media for presenting search results — was vacated and remanded for further proceedings. The Federal Circuit found the parties' remaining arguments unpersuasive and sent the matter back to the PTAB.
Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB Patentability Ruling on Search Presentation Tech
Case No. 22-1012 is an appeal before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, filed on 5 October 2021 and closed on 9 January 2023. The appeal arose from an invalidity/cancellation action before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concerning US14/628093 (published as US20160246791A1), a patent application directed to methods, systems, and media for presenting search results. Party identities are not disclosed in the available record.
The recorded Basis of Termination is 'Vacated and Remanded.' The Federal Circuit's docket order states: 'We have considered the parties' other arguments and find them unpersuasive. For the reasons given, we vacate the Board's decision and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. VACATED AND REMANDED.' The PTAB's prior patentability determination is accordingly nullified, and the matter returns to the Board for further consideration.
The 461-day duration from filing to disposition is consistent with the Federal Circuit's typical appellate timeline for PTAB appeals. The vacatur suggests the Federal Circuit identified a legal or analytical error in the Board's patentability analysis sufficient to require reconsideration, though the specific grounds are not disclosed in the available record beyond the court's brief disposition. The outcome leaves patentability of US14/628093 unresolved pending the PTAB's further proceedings.
See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →Filing to Vacated and Remanded in 461 days
461 days from filing to Federal Circuit disposition — typical Federal Circuit appeal resolves in 12–18 months
US14/628093 — Methods, Systems, and Media for Presenting Search Results
Any organisation developing or deploying products that present, rank, or format search results — including general-purpose search engines, enterprise search platforms, e-commerce product search, or content discovery feeds — should consider this application within their FTO review. US14/628093 has not been finally invalidated: the PTAB's cancellation decision was vacated and the matter remanded, meaning enforceability risk is live and unresolved.
Official order — verbatim text
The Federal Circuit's disposition — 'vacated and remanded' — sets aside the PTAB's patentability decision in its entirety and directs the Board to conduct further proceedings consistent with the appellate court's opinion. The court explicitly noted it found the parties' remaining arguments unpersuasive, suggesting the vacatur rests on a discrete legal or analytical ground identified in the opinion rather than a wholesale rejection of either party's position. The specific reasoning is not reproduced in the available case record summary.
Federal Circuit vacates and remands: what the ruling means for both parties
Vacatur nullifies the PTAB decision — the Board must reconsider
A 'vacated and remanded' disposition means the Federal Circuit has set aside the PTAB's prior decision entirely. It carries no merits adjudication on patentability itself — instead, the Board is directed to reanalyse the dispute consistent with the Federal Circuit's opinion. The PTAB's earlier ruling has no continuing legal force.
Decision nullifiedAppellant avoids an adverse final ruling — proceedings reopen at the Board
For the appellant, vacatur is a meaningful procedural win: the unfavourable PTAB outcome no longer stands. The remand reopens the proceedings, giving the appellant a renewed opportunity to argue patentability before the Board on corrected legal grounds. However, the ultimate patentability determination remains outstanding.
Remand opportunityAppellee's PTAB victory is set aside pending further Board review
The appellee, who had prevailed at the PTAB level, loses the benefit of that ruling — at least temporarily. The Board must now reconsider the patentability question consistent with the Federal Circuit's guidance. A final outcome favourable to the appellee remains possible, but must be re-established through further Board proceedings.
Prior win nullifiedSearch results presentation IP remains contested — sector uncertainty persists
For companies operating in search technology, information retrieval, and digital media platforms, the vacatur means US14/628093 has not been finally invalidated. The patent's enforceability remains uncertain pending the PTAB remand. Parties with FTO concerns in the search results presentation space should monitor the remand proceedings closely.
Patentability unresolvedFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Plaintiff | Individual | Appellant in Federal Circuit appeal concerning patentability of US14/628093 — search results presentation technologySearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Defendant | Individual | Appellee in Federal Circuit appeal; identity not disclosed in the available recordSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitSearch in Eureka ↗ |
R&D signals in the search results presentation patent space
Forward-looking patent and innovation intelligence derived from Case 22-1012 and the technology domain of US14/628093 — methods, systems, and media for presenting search results.
Appellant's filing activity in search presentation technology
The appellant's decision to pursue a Federal Circuit appeal of the PTAB's patentability ruling suggests a substantive commitment to protecting IP in the search results presentation domain. Reviewing the appellant's broader portfolio for related applications, continuations, or CIPs in this space can reveal the strategic perimeter they are trying to establish around search UI and ranking methods.
Portfolio mappingFiling trends in search results formatting and presentation patents
The search results presentation space has seen sustained patent activity from major search engine operators, e-commerce platforms, and content aggregators. Tracking filing trends around ranked result display, snippet generation, and query-result interface design reveals where R&D investment is concentrating — and where white space may exist for differentiated approaches.
Landscape analysisAppellee's defensive patent strategy in search technology
The appellee successfully challenged US14/628093 at the PTAB — a posture consistent with a defensive inter partes or post-grant review strategy. Understanding the appellee's own patent holdings in search, information retrieval, or query processing can clarify whether this challenge was primarily defensive, or part of a broader IP clearing effort in the sector.
Defensive IP analysisAdjacent innovation opportunities near search results presentation claims
With US14/628093 claims contested and the PTAB's decision vacated, adjacent claim territory in search result media formats, personalised result presentation, multimodal search output, and AI-driven ranking interfaces may represent patentable white space. R&D teams exploring next-generation search UX should map existing claim density before investing in this direction.
White space opportunitySimilar Federal Circuit PTAB Appeals in Search & Information Retrieval
Explore comparable Federal Circuit vacatur and remand decisions arising from PTAB patentability challenges in the search technology and information retrieval domain.
What this case signals for the search technology IP landscape
A Federal Circuit vacatur in a PTAB patentability appeal signals more than a procedural reset — it shapes how the Board must approach the technology going forward.
Vacatur keeps search results presentation patent alive — monitor the remand
US14/628093 has not been finally invalidated. Any party who structured FTO analysis around the PTAB's prior cancellation decision should revisit that assessment. The remand could restore meaningful enforceability risk in the methods, systems, and media for presenting search results domain.
Federal Circuit intervention signals a substantive legal error at the Board
Vacatur — rather than affirmance — suggests the Federal Circuit identified a legal or procedural deficiency in the PTAB's patentability analysis. Companies tracking search UI and results-ranking patent disputes should note that the Board's standard of analysis for this technology area may shift on remand.
Plaintiff v Defendant — key questions answered
The Federal Circuit vacated the PTAB's patentability decision on US14/628093 and remanded for further proceedings. The court found the parties' remaining arguments unpersuasive and identified grounds requiring the Board to reconsider its ruling. The specific reasoning is not reproduced in the available case record summary. Party identities are not disclosed in the available record.
Vacatur nullifies the PTAB's prior patentability determination, meaning US14/628093 has not been finally invalidated. Enforceability is unresolved pending the Board's reconsidered decision on remand. Parties who relied on the PTAB's earlier ruling for FTO purposes should reassess their position.
US14/628093, published as US20160246791A1, is a US patent application covering methods, systems, and media for presenting search results. It falls within the information retrieval and search technology domain. The specific claims are not reproduced in the available case record, but the application is directed at how search results are structured, delivered, and presented to users.
A reversal means the Federal Circuit disagrees with the lower tribunal's conclusion and substitutes its own outcome. A vacatur means the lower decision is set aside — typically because of a legal error — but the matter is sent back for further proceedings rather than being finally decided by the appellate court. In Case 22-1012, the PTAB must now reconsider patentability consistent with the Federal Circuit's guidance.
Yes, particularly companies developing or deploying products that present, rank, or format search results. US14/628093 remains potentially enforceable pending the PTAB's remand decision. The outcome of those proceedings could affect FTO positions, design-around strategies, and licensing considerations across the search, e-commerce, and content discovery sectors.
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.