Fed. Cir.

Polar Electro Oy v. Suunto Oy, No. 24-1801 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 3, 2025)

Rule 36 Affirmance

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.: No. 24-1801
Decided: December 3, 2025
Judge: Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document: Rule 36 Judgment
Length: 2 pages

Full Text Analysis Cite this Opinion

Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

POLAR ELECTRO OY,

Plaintiff-Appellant

SUUNTO OY, AMER SPORTS WINTER &

OUTDOOR,

Defendants

FIRSTBEAT TECHNOLOGIES OY,

Defendant-Appellee

2024-1801

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Utah in No. 1:17-cv-00139-CW, Senior Judge Clark Waddoups.

JUDGMENT

ANTHONY J. FUGA, Holland & Knight LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by JOHN P. MORAN, Washington, DC.

SIDDHESH PANDIT, Maier and Maier, Alexandria, VA,

2argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by MICHAEL RAYMOND CASEY.

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (DYK, REYNA, and CHEN, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

December 3, 2025

Date

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Polar Electro Oy v. Suunto Oy, No. 24-1801 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 3, 2025).

Record ID: CAFC-24-1801-20251203
Permalink: https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-24-1801-20251203

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.

Source: Federal Circuit opinions and orders · retrieved August 15, 2026 · Report an error