Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

On24, Inc. v. Webinar.Net, Inc., No. 25-1633 (Fed. Cir. July 30, 2026)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 25-1633
Decided
July 30, 2026
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

ON24, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

WEBINAR.NET, INC.,

Defendant-Cross-Appellant

2025-1633, 2025-1717

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:21-cv-07721-EMC, Judge Edward M. Chen.

JUDGMENT

NAGENDRA SETTY, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Seattle, WA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by ALEX V. CHACHKES, Chachkes Law PLLC, Brooklyn, NY. STEPHEN HEALY, Law Office of Stephen Healy, Petaluma, CA, argued for defendant-cross-appellant. Also represented by SEAN D. HEALY, CLAYTON MULLALY.

2THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

Figure on page 2 of the opinion

July 30, 2026

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

On24, Inc. v. Webinar.Net, Inc., No. 25-1633 (Fed. Cir. July 30, 2026).

Record ID
CAFC-25-1633-20260730
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-25-1633-20260730

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.