ABOUT THIS EPISODE
The Federal Circuit hears Meta Platforms versus AlmondNet, an appeal involving a patent for linking devices through a shared internet address and using activity on one device to target advertising on another. Meta asked the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to invalidate the challenged claims, arguing that earlier technology made the claimed combination obvious. The Board found that Meta had not proved its case, and Meta appealed. The dispute centers on whether Meta’s proposed combination determines that two devices used the same address during a predetermined time period. You will hear references to D H C P, the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. It can assign an address for a limited lease period. Renewal can keep the same address in use beyond that original period, and the parties disagree about what this means for the patent’s timing requirement. Substantial-evidence review asks whether the record contains evidence a reasonable person could accept as supporting the Board’s factual findings.
Meta Platforms, Inc. v. AlmondNet, Inc. (No. 25-1638) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued October 7, 2026.
Sources:
Argument audio — Federal Circuit:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/oral-arguments/25-1638_10072026.mp3
Case and argument date — official Federal Circuit announcement:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/10-07-2026-2025-1638-meta-platforms-inc-v-almondnet-inc-audio-uploaded/
Patent background and Board decision — IPR2023-01281, February 19, 2025:
https://ptacts.uspto.gov/ptacts/public-informations/petitions/1554458/download-documents?artifactId=3DrnRtdbqT_EISvyorN9IwmR2HqSZvm3Sh51zIAVoVWYNH7NtXZCBxg
Appeal grounds and counsel — Meta’s notice of appeal, April 7, 2025:
https://ptacts.uspto.gov/ptacts/public-informations/petitions/1554458/download-documents?artifactId=HuDcMqkTeT0jWiSBBmfUqVxjuxwGWVB455JcJZEUnE6UexjaoV-j2bA
Parties and joined proceedings — corrected Federal Circuit order, September 3, 2025:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/25-1638.ORDER.9-3-2025_2567215.pdf
DHCP leases and renewal — IETF RFC 2131, §§ 3.3 and 4.4.5:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2131
Review of Patent Office findings — Dickinson v. Zurko:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/98-377
Review of Board factual findings — Celgene v. Peter, page 9:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/18-1167.opinion.7-30-2019.pdf
James Milkey’s firm — Russ August & Kabat:
https://www.raklaw.com/attorney/james-a-milkey/
Meta Platforms, Inc. v. AlmondNet, Inc. (No. 25-1638) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued October 7, 2026.
Sources:
Argument audio — Federal Circuit:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/oral-arguments/25-1638_10072026.mp3
Case and argument date — official Federal Circuit announcement:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/10-07-2026-2025-1638-meta-platforms-inc-v-almondnet-inc-audio-uploaded/
Patent background and Board decision — IPR2023-01281, February 19, 2025:
https://ptacts.uspto.gov/ptacts/public-informations/petitions/1554458/download-documents?artifactId=3DrnRtdbqT_EISvyorN9IwmR2HqSZvm3Sh51zIAVoVWYNH7NtXZCBxg
Appeal grounds and counsel — Meta’s notice of appeal, April 7, 2025:
https://ptacts.uspto.gov/ptacts/public-informations/petitions/1554458/download-documents?artifactId=HuDcMqkTeT0jWiSBBmfUqVxjuxwGWVB455JcJZEUnE6UexjaoV-j2bA
Parties and joined proceedings — corrected Federal Circuit order, September 3, 2025:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/25-1638.ORDER.9-3-2025_2567215.pdf
DHCP leases and renewal — IETF RFC 2131, §§ 3.3 and 4.4.5:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2131
Review of Patent Office findings — Dickinson v. Zurko:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/98-377
Review of Board factual findings — Celgene v. Peter, page 9:
https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/18-1167.opinion.7-30-2019.pdf
James Milkey’s firm — Russ August & Kabat:
https://www.raklaw.com/attorney/james-a-milkey/
English
United States
TRANSCRIPT 🔗
Are you the producer of this podcast?
Add a podcast transcript
Need Audio-to-Text?
Transcribe with Listen411 in Just 60 Seconds
SEARCH PAST EPISODES
Search past episodes of Oral Arguments, with Context.
OTHER EPISODES IN THIS PODCAST
The Federal Circuit hears Givn Goods versus Squires. Givn sells bottled drinking water under the registered name GIVN, pronounced “given.” IBMG sought federal registration of that same name for cosmetics and online beauty retail services. Givn opposed those applications, saying shoppers would mista…
The Second Circuit hears Brewington versus Kaur. The dispute began in New York Family Court, over Brewington's child-support obligations. She says court officials mishandled her challenges and violated her constitutional rights, causing serious financial harm. She brought a federal civil-rights law…
The Federal Circuit hears Brightex Bio-Photonics versus L’Oréal USA. Brightex sued L’Oréal over a patent on computerized skin-treatment recommendations. The claimed method guides a user in photographing their face, measures skin features, compares them with population data, and recommends treatment…
The Federal Circuit hears In re Burandt. Corliss Burandt developed technology for controlling valves in automobile engines. A related patent application was abandoned for years, then revived by the Patent Office in 2010. Revival returned it to examination; it did not guarantee a patent. Burandt say…
The Federal Circuit hears Sunrez Corporation versus the United States. The Air Force hired Sunrez to develop six prototype cargo pallets under a small-business research contract. The parties then disputed how much technical information Sunrez had to deliver, and when. A technical data package, or T…
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Oral Arguments, with Context, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
EDIT
Thank you for helping to keep the podcast database up to date.