In Re Ntp, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2010). · Go Syfert
Search
In Re Ntp, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases · …this court does not reweigh evi- dence on appeal, but rather determines whether substan- tial evidence supports the board's fact findings. at p. 1292 ⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases · …this court does not reweigh evidence on ap- peal, but rather determines whether substantial evidence supports the board's fact findings. at p. 1292 ⚠ not in text
99 citation events (99 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc. (cafc, 2026-06-09)
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2011 2018 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2026 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
keeping in mind that these are anticipation, case: 24-2119 document: 48 page: 6 filed: 06/09/2026 6 google llc v. sonos, inc. not obviousness rejections, the failure to disclose this claim element requires reversal of these rejections.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) In Re R.S. LIPMAN BREWING COMPANY, LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2025 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
this court does not reweigh evidence on appeal, but rather de- termines whether substantial evidence supports the board's fact findings.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) United Trademark Holdings, Inc v. Disney Enterprises, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2022 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
this court does not reweigh evi- dence on appeal, but rather determines whether substan- tial evidence supports the board's fact findings.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) United Trademark Holdings, Inc v. Disney Enterprises, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2022 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
this court does not reweigh evi- dence on appeal, but rather determines whether substan- tial evidence supports the board's fact findings.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Haag-Streit Ag v. Eidolon Optical, LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2021 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
this court does not reweigh evidence on appeal, but rather deter- mines whether substantial evidence supports the board's fact findings.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Facebook, Inc. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2020 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
this court does not reweigh evidence on ap- peal, but rather determines whether substantial evidence supports the board's fact findings.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Facebook, Inc. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2020 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
this court does not reweigh evidence on ap- peal, but rather determines whether substantial evidence supports the board's fact findings.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Sophos Limited v. Iancu
Fed. Cir. · 2018 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
while the board must give the terms their broadest reasonable construction, the construction cannot be divorced from the specification and the record evidence.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Celgene Corporation v. Peter
Fed. Cir. · 2019 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
this court does not reweigh evidence on appeal, but rather determines whether substantial evidence supports the board's fact findings.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Carroll-Harris v. DVA
Fed. Cir. · 2026 · confidence medium
Cir. 2016) (“Under the substantial evidence Case: 24-2213 Document: 88 Page: 9 Filed: 05/07/2026 CARROLL-HARRIS v. DVA 9 standard of review, we ‘do[] not reweigh evidence on ap- peal.’” (quoting In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Barrette v. DVA
Fed. Cir. · 2025 · confidence medium
Cir. 2016) (“Under the substantial evi- dence standard of review, we ‘do[ ] not reweigh evidence on appeal.’” (quoting In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Oleinic v. Air Force
Fed. Cir. · 2025 · confidence medium
Under the substantial evidence standard of review, we “do[ ] not reweigh evidence on appeal.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Cardiovalve Ltd.
Fed. Cir. · 2025 · confidence medium
“Anticipation is a question of fact as is the question of what a reference teaches.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) White v. Opm
Fed. Cir. · 2025 · confidence medium
Ms. White’s arguments amount to a dispute that the Board improperly weighed documents in the record, but “this court does not reweigh evidence on ap- peal.” In re NTP, Inc, 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Ravgen, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2025 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Ravgen, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2025 · confidence medium
“This court does not reweigh evidence on appeal.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kirsch Research and Development, LLC v. Gaf Materials LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
J.A. 38; see also J.A. 5193 at 2:50-51 (Lou stating “the coating and calendering steps . . . can be performed as a continuous process”); In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kirsch Research and Development, LLC v. Gaf Materials LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
J.A. 38; see also J.A. 5193 at 2:50-51 (Lou stating “the coating and calendering steps . . . can be performed as a continuous process”); In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Pfizer Inc. v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
Not only does Pfizer’s argument call on us to reweigh evi- dence presented to the Board—which is not the role of this court, see In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Universal Electronics, Inc. v. Roku, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2023 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Universal Electronics, Inc. v. Roku, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2023 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Basf Corporation v. Ingevity South Carolina, LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2023 · confidence medium
“This court does not reweigh evidence on ap- peal, but rather determines whether substantial evidence supports the Board’s fact findings.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Basf Corporation v. Ingevity South Carolina, LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2023 · confidence medium
“This court does not reweigh evidence on ap- peal, but rather determines whether substantial evidence supports the Board’s fact findings.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED
D.N.J. · 2023 · confidence medium
“Care must be taken to avoid hindsight reconstruction by using the patent in suit as a guide through the maze of prior art references, combining the night references in the right way so as to achieve the result of the claims in suit.” Jn re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1299 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Trustees of Columbia Univ. v. Illumina, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2021 · confidence medium
Cir. 2019) (quot- ing In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Nexus Technologies, Inc. v. Unlimited Power Ltd.
W.D.N.C. · 2020 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1291 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hayward Industries, Inc. v. Pentair Water Pool and Spa
Fed. Cir. · 2020 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Cg Technology Development, LLC v. Fanduel, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2019 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Telefonaktiebolaget Lm v. Tcl Corporation
Fed. Cir. · 2019 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1296 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Angiodynamics, Incorporated
Fed. Cir. · 2018 · confidence medium
“As with any claim construction analysis, we begin with the claim language.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1288 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2018 · confidence medium
Because “[t]his court does not reweigh evidence on appeal, but rather determines whether substantial evidence supports the [PTAB]’s fact findings,” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ayyadurai v. Floor64, Inc.
D. Mass. · 2017 · confidence medium
Similarly, in the context" of a patent disputé, the Federal Circuit has held that “a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that an electronic mail message must include a destination address and must have the capacity to include an address of an originating processor, messáge content (such as text or an attachment), and a subject.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1289 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hitachi Metals, Ltd. v. Alliance of Rare-Earth Permanent Magnet Industry
Fed. Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
However, we do not “reweigh evidence on appeal.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Motorola Mobility LLC (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fed. Cir. · 2017 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d at 1291-93 (finding substantial evidence sup *629 ported the Board’s determination that a document’s earliest reliable date was as reported in the document—rather than an earlier, pre-critical date reported by inventors).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Mylan Institutional LLC v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd.
Fed. Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
We do not “reweigh evidence on appeal.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) E2Interactive, Inc. v. Blackhawk Network, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
But we do not “reweigh evidence on appeal.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re: Apple Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
“While the Board must give the terms their broadest reasonable construction, the construction cannot be divorced from the specification and the record evidence.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1288 (Fed.
examined Cited as authority (rule) Jones v. Department of Health & Human Services (3×) also: Cited "see"
Fed. Cir. · 2016 · confidence medium
Under the substantial evidence standard of review, we “do[] not reweigh evidence on appeal.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
examined Cited as authority (rule) In Re: Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. (3×) also: Cited "see"
Fed. Cir. · 2016 · confidence medium
See In re NTP, Inc.; 654 F.3d 1279, 1292 (Fed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sas Institute, Inc. v. Complementsoft, LLC. (2×)
Fed. Cir. · 2016 · confidence medium
This is to say that “[e]ven under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the Board’s con- struction cannot be divorced from the specification and the record evidence, and must be consistent with the one that those skilled in the art would reach.” Proxyconn, 789 F.3d at 1298 (internal quotation marks omitted) (first quoting In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1288 (Fed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re Man MacHine Interface Technologies LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2016 · confidence medium
“While the Board must give the terms their broadest reasonable construction, the construction cannot be divorced from the specification and the record evidence.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1288 (Fed.Cir.2011).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Radware, Ltd. v. F5 Networks, Inc.
N.D. Cal. · 2015 · confidence medium
In re NTP, 654 F.3d 1279, 1291 (Fed.Cir.2011) (“An inventor cannot rely on uncorroborated testimony to establish a prior invention date____It has long been the case that an inventor’s allegations of earlier invention alone are insufficient — an alleged date of invention must be corroborated.) (citations omitted); Cooper, 154 F.3d at 1330 (“In order to establish an actual reduction to practice, an inventor’s testimony must be corroborated by independent evidence.”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Power Integrations, Inc. v. Lee
Fed. Cir. · 2015 · confidence medium
Indeed, in reexamination it applies a different claim construction standard than that applied by a district court, affording claims “their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1287 (Fed.Cir.2011) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also In re Am.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Microsoft Corporation v. Proxyconn, Inc.
Fed. Cir. · 2015 · confidence medium
Even under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the Board’s construction “cannot be divorced from the specification and the record evidence,” In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1288 (Fed.Cir.2011), and “must be consistent with the one that those skilled in the art would reach,” In re Cortright, 165 F.3d 1353, 1358 (Fed.Cir.1999).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Janssen Products, L.P. v. Lupin Ltd. (2×)
D.N.J. · 2014 · confidence medium
Iron Grip Barbell Co. v. USA Sports, Inc., 392 F.3d 1317, 1320 (Fed.Cir.2004); see also KSR, 550 U.S. at 421 , 127 S.Ct. 1727 ; Graham, 383 U.S. at 36 , 86 S.Ct. 684 ; In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1299 (Fed.Cir.2011).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Tempo Lighting, Inc. v. Tivoli, LLC
Fed. Cir. · 2014 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.Cir. 2011).
examined Cited as authority (rule) In Re Enhanced Security Research, LLC (4×)
Fed. Cir. · 2014 · confidence medium
The government cites In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1296 (Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Amkor Technology, Inc. v. International Trade Commission
Fed. Cir. · 2012 · confidence medium
In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed.Cir.2011).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re Ntp, Inc.
2010-1243.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Sep 14, 2010.
654 F.3d 1279
Unpublished
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 66%
Citer courts: Federal Circuit (1)

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit (Reexamination No. 90/006,676) IN RE NTP, INC., 2010-1243 Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. ON MOTION ORDER The Director of the United States Patent and Trade- mark Office moves without opposition for a 25-day exten- sion of time-, until September 17, 2010, to file his brief. NTP, Inc. moves without opposition to extend the time to file its reply brief to 34 days from service of the Director’s brief NTP also moves without opposition to extend the time to file the joint appendix to 14 days from the date of service of the reply brief. Upon consideration thereof IT ls 0RDERED THAT:

IN RE NTP The motions are granted 2 FOR THE COURT 1 4 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date ccc Brian M. Bnroker, Esq. S Raymond T. Chen, Esq. J an Horba1y Clerk § tie §§-.

SEP 14 2010 JAN HORBAL¥ CLERK