Fullview, Inc. v. Polycom, Inc.

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
FULLVIEW, INC.,
Plaintiff-Petitioner
v.
POLYCOM, INC.,
Defendant-Respondent
______________________
2026-121
______________________
On Petition for Permission to Appeal pursuant to 28
U.S.C. Section 1292(b) from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:18-cv-
00510-EMC, Judge Edward M. Chen.
______________________
ON PETITION
______________________
Before DYK, REYNA, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.
REYNA, Circuit Judge.
O R D E R
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), FullView, Inc. seeks
permission to appeal orders of the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California that, inter
alia, (1) determined some of the asserted patent claims are
Case: 26-121 Document: 10 Page: 1 Filed: 04/16/2026

-- 1 of 2 --

FULLVIEW, INC. v. POLYCOM, INC. 2
invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and (2) excluded FullView’s
expert testimony on damages. The district court certified
the orders pursuant to § 1292(b).
Under § 1292(b), the Northern District of California
may certify that an order that is not otherwise immediately
appealable is one involving a controlling question of law as
to which there is substantial ground for difference of opin-
ion and for which an immediate appeal may materially ad-
vance the ultimate termination of the litigation.
Ultimately, this court must exercise its own discretion in
deciding whether to grant permission to appeal an interloc-
utory order. See In re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Pat.
Litig., 903 F.2d 822, 822 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In this case, we
decline to grant permission to appeal under § 1292(b).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The petition for permission to appeal is denied.
April 16, 2026
Date
FOR THE COURT
Case: 26-121 Document: 10 Page: 2 Filed: 04/16/2026

-- 2 of 2 --