⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Federal Circuit reviews a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision about Centripetal's network-security patent. Data exfiltration means stealing information out of a network; the patent addresses traffic that can look ordinary to a firewall. Its example allows ordinary web browsing but blocks file uploads and form submissions. Centripetal accused Keysight of infringing the patent in 2022. Keysight later challenged all twenty claims before the Board, relying on a Sourcefire intrusion-prevention manual and a file containing more than eleven thousand Emerging Threats rules. The Board found eighteen claims unpatentable for obviousness but left claims five and twelve standing. Obviousness asks whether the claimed differences would have been obvious to a skilled practitioner. Centripetal says the Board never adequately explained why that practitioner would select a commented-out SSL version three rule, enable it, and change it from alerting to blocking traffic. Keysight's cross-appeal says the Board misread its petition when it left the two dependent claims standing based on a separate HTTP POST rule. On factual findings, substantial-evidence review asks whether a reasonable mind could accept the record as adequate; the court does not reweigh the evidence.

Centripetal Networks, LLC v. Keysight Technologies, Inc. (No. 25-1052) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued September 11, 2026.