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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Canadian Solar, Inc. v. Maxeon Solar PTE. Ltd., No. 26-1525 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, 2026)

Vacated & Remanded
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 26-1525
Decided
August 12, 2026
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Order on Motion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

CANADIAN SOLAR, INC.,

Appellant

v.

MAXEON SOLAR PTE. LTD.,

Appellee

2026-1525

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2024-01039.

ON MOTION

Before LOURIE, PROST, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.

O R D E R

In response to a patent infringement suit brought by Maxeon Solar PTE. Ltd., Canadian Solar, Inc. (“CSI”) commenced the underlying inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding. CSI appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision that claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 8,222,516 was not2 2 CANADIAN SOLAR, INC. v. MAXEON SOLAR PTE. LTD.

shown to be unpatentable. Maxeon now moves to dismiss the appeal as moot in view of its “unilateral covenant not to sue” CSI for infringement. ECF No. 6 at 21. CSI does not oppose dismissal but requests vacatur, which Maxeon opposes.

“Vacatur is in order when mootness occurs through . . . the unilateral action of the party who prevailed” before the originating tribunal. Arizonans for Off. Eng. v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 71–72 (1997) (cleaned up). Here, CSI’s appeal became moot based on Maxeon’s unilateral actions. We therefore dismiss the appeal as moot and vacate the relevant portion of the Board’s decision. We see no need to go further and order the Board to dismiss the petition insofar as it challenged claim 12. See MemoryWeb, LLC v. Samsung Elecs. Co., No. 2024-1315, 2025 WL 3494918, at *2 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 5, 2025).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motions are granted to the extent the appeal is dismissed as moot and the final written decision is vacated as to claim 12 of the ’516 patent.

(2) Each party shall bear its own costs.

FOR THE COURT

Figure on page 2 of the opinion

August 12, 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

Canadian Solar, Inc. v. Maxeon Solar PTE. Ltd., No. 26-1525 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, 2026).

Record ID
CAFC-26-1525-20260812
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-26-1525-20260812

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.