In re HighLevel, Inc. — Federal Circuit Denies Patentability Petition (Case 25-148)
HighLevel, Inc. petitioned the Federal Circuit to challenge the patentability of two website creation system patents — US10846357B2 and US11361047B2. The court denied the petition outright, closing the case in just 102 days without reaching a merits ruling on invalidity.
Federal Circuit shuts down HighLevel’s patentability challenge at the gate
In re HighLevel, Inc. (Case No. 25-148) was filed at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on 29 August 2025, with HighLevel, Inc. as petitioner seeking to challenge the patentability of two patents: US10846357B2 and US11361047B2. Both patents cover a website creation system designed to generate sites featuring directional — or funnel-style — webpages, a technology commercially significant in digital marketing and SaaS platform contexts.
The Federal Circuit denied the petition on 9 December 2025, terminating the case on the basis of ‘Petition Dismissed.’ The court also granted a motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief, accepting that brief for the record — indicating external parties had an interest in the patentability question — but this did not alter the outcome. No merits ruling on invalidity or cancellation was issued; the petition was refused at threshold.
The 102-day resolution suggests the Federal Circuit disposed of the petition on procedural or jurisdictional grounds without extensive merits analysis. What drove the denial — whether standing, procedural defects, or failure to meet the petition threshold — is not disclosed in the public record. The acceptance of the amicus brief is notable, suggesting the underlying patents may remain contested commercially even after the dismissal.
Filing to Petition Dismissed in 102 days
102 days — faster than the median Federal Circuit appeal disposition
Petition denied: what the Federal Circuit’s refusal means for both sides
Petition denial ends the challenge without merits review
A petition denial at the Federal Circuit means the court declined to entertain the substantive patentability challenge. Unlike an affirmance or reversal, no ruling was made on whether the patents are valid or invalid. The basis of termination — ‘Petition Dismissed’ — typically signals a procedural, jurisdictional, or threshold deficiency in the petition itself, leaving the underlying patents legally unaffected.
No merits adjudicationHighLevel’s invalidity challenge fails at first hurdle
HighLevel’s petition was denied without the Federal Circuit engaging on validity grounds. This is a materially worse outcome than a merits loss on appeal: it suggests the challenge was not procedurally viable in this form. HighLevel may need to pursue alternative invalidity routes — such as inter partes review at the USPTO — if it wishes to continue contesting the patents, subject to timing and estoppel constraints.
Petitioner rebuffedPatents survive challenge — enforceability position strengthened short-term
With the petition dismissed and no merits ruling issued, US10846357B2 and US11361047B2 remain in force and legally unweakened by this proceeding. The patent holder’s enforcement posture is bolstered in the near term. However, the acceptance of an amicus brief suggests broader industry interest in the patentability question, which could signal further challenge attempts through other proceedings.
Patents intactDirectional webpage patents remain a live risk for SaaS competitors
The survival of these website creation system patents — covering directional or funnel-style webpage architectures — maintains IP risk for SaaS platforms and digital marketing tools that implement comparable functionality. HighLevel’s failed petition, and the interest of amici, suggests these patents are commercially contested. Competitors operating in this space should assess design-around options and monitor for renewed USPTO proceedings.
Sector risk persistsFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | In re: HighLevel, Inc. | Company | SaaS platform company — petitioner challenging US10846357B2 and US11361047B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Defendant | Individual | No defendant named — in re proceeding before the Federal CircuitSearch 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 is terse but consequential: the petition is denied, and the amicus motion is granted. The denial language carries no merits analysis — the court did not assess claim validity, prior art, or patentability standards. In Federal Circuit petition practice, this typically indicates the petition failed to satisfy threshold requirements for the specific procedural vehicle used, rather than reflecting a substantive assessment that the patents are valid. The acceptance of the amicus brief, while formally inconsequential to the outcome, confirms third-party interest in the patentability question remains live.
US10846357B2 & US11361047B2 — Directional Webpage Website Creation Systems
US10846357B2 (application US15/880226) and US11361047B2 (application US17/247041) both protect technology in the field of guided or funnel-based web experiences — specifically systems and methods for creating websites comprising at least one series of directional webpages. This architecture is foundational to sales funnel, lead generation, and conversion-optimised web platforms, a category that has grown substantially with the SaaS marketing technology sector.
These patents are strategically significant because directional or sequential webpage flows are core infrastructure for a broad swath of digital marketing SaaS tools, landing page builders, and CRM-integrated funnel platforms. A patent covering the creation system itself — rather than a narrow UI feature — potentially has wide claim reach across competing implementations. The contested status of these patents, evidenced by HighLevel’s petition and third-party amicus participation, suggests multiple market participants view them as blocking or shaping competitive product design in this space.
Should your platform run an FTO against US10846357B2 and US11361047B2?
Any SaaS platform, website builder, or digital marketing tool that enables users to create sequential, directional, or funnel-style webpage flows should treat these patents as a priority FTO target. The petition denial means both patents remain fully enforceable. R&D teams building onboarding flows, sales funnels, or guided webpage series should map their implementations against the asserted claim language before feature launch or product expansion.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can systematically analyse claim scope for US10846357B2 and US11361047B2, surface prior art that may support invalidity arguments, and identify design-around opportunities specific to your product architecture. Use Eureka to benchmark your webpage creation workflows against the broadest independent claims and generate a defensible clearance record ahead of any enforcement action.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US10846357B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar Federal Circuit cases involving SaaS and web technology patentability
Browse related Federal Circuit petition and appeal proceedings involving website creation, SaaS platform patents, and directional or funnel-based web technology patent validity disputes.
What this case signals for the SaaS and web technology IP landscape
A failed Federal Circuit petition leaves contested patents intact and alternative challenge paths open — but narrowing.
Petition dismissal without merits leaves IPR as the most viable next route
When a Federal Circuit petition is denied on procedural grounds, inter partes review at the USPTO typically remains the most accessible invalidity mechanism. SaaS companies facing these patents should assess IPR petition windows carefully — one-year bars from service of complaint can foreclose this option if not monitored proactively.
Amicus participation signals broad industry concern over these patents
The Federal Circuit’s acceptance of an amicus brief in a petition proceeding is unusual and commercially meaningful. It suggests that multiple parties — beyond HighLevel — view US10846357B2 and US11361047B2 as having sector-wide implications for directional webpage and funnel-based web platform technology.
In v Defendant — key questions answered
The public record does not disclose the specific grounds for denial. The Federal Circuit issued a brief order stating only that the petition is denied. In Federal Circuit practice, petition denials without explanation typically indicate failure to meet procedural or jurisdictional thresholds rather than a substantive merits ruling on patentability.
Both patents remain in full force and effect. The petition dismissal does not invalidate or limit any claims. The patent holder retains all enforcement rights. HighLevel and any other challengers would need to pursue separate proceedings — such as inter partes review at the USPTO — to continue contesting validity, subject to applicable deadlines and estoppel rules.
The Federal Circuit granted a motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief and accepted it for the record. This signals that at least one third party had a material interest in the patentability question. While the amicus participation did not change the outcome, it is commercially significant — it suggests the validity of these website creation system patents is a concern beyond HighLevel alone.
Potentially, yes — but subject to constraints. Inter partes review petitions must typically be filed within one year of being served with a complaint asserting the patent. If no infringement suit has been filed, the one-year bar may not yet apply. However, the petition denial may create estoppel implications depending on the specific procedural vehicle used. HighLevel should conduct a detailed procedural audit before refiling.
US10846357B2 and US11361047B2 cover a website creation system for creating websites having at least one series of directional webpages, and related methods. In practical terms, this covers funnel-based or guided webpage architectures commonly used in digital marketing platforms, landing page builders, and SaaS CRM tools that present users with sequential, conversion-optimised web experiences.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.