Source: IPWatchdog

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Samesurf, Inc. v. Intuit Inc. on May 21, 2026, affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board final written decision that all claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,185,145 are unpatentable for obviousness. Circuit Judge Stark authored the opinion, joined by Judges Dyk and Chen, and the court agreed with the PTAB’s construction of the central disputed term, concluding the record supported the Board’s obviousness analysis.

The court construed “web browsing interaction data” to mean “data related to web browsing interactions,” a broad reading that can encompass webpages and partially filled webpages delivered during synchronized browsing sessions. The Board had found that the prior art—WIPO publication “Lebrun” combined with U.S. publication “Wang”—disclosed or suggested the disputed limitation, and the Federal Circuit rejected Samesurf’s narrower construction that would confine the term to data describing host-device interactions only. The opinion cited Thorner v. Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC to explain that patentees may use broad terms and will not have those terms restricted absent explicit definition or disclaimer, and referenced Liebel‑Flarsheim regarding single-embodiment specifications not limiting claim scope without clear intent. The court also addressed dependent claim 5’s language, found no record evidence that partially filled webpages would render the invention inoperable, and concluded that Samesurf’s proposed construction would improperly restrict synchronized session control to the host device. Having affirmed the Board’s claim construction and reviewed the remaining limitations, the Federal Circuit held that the combined prior art rendered all challenged claims of the ’145 patent unpatentable on obviousness grounds and affirmed the PTAB’s judgment.