A Better Newspaper

Developing Story

Ollnova Technologies v. ecobee Technologies – CAFC Patent Eligibility Remand (2026)

The CAFC issued a precedential ruling in Ollnova v. ecobee vacating EDTX infringement and damages judgments due to erroneous Alice jury instructions, while remanding § 101 eligibility for resolution. The decision is significant for trial practitioners, building automation IP strategy, and the ongoing tension around Section 101 standards.

Importance: 68%Confidence: 88%Mentions: 1Updated: June 10, 2026
## Overview The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision in *Ollnova Technologies Ltd. v. ecobee Technologies ULC*, vacating judgments entered by the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX) and remanding to determine patent-eligibility issues under 35 U.S.C. § 101. (IPWatchdog, June 9, 2026) ## Patents and Technology Ollnova's patents are reportedly directed to building automation systems (BAS) that address technical challenges in smart building infrastructure. The district court had entered judgments on infringement and damages prior to resolving the § 101 eligibility question. (IPWatchdog, June 9, 2026) ## CAFC Holdings - **Infringement ruling reversed**: The Federal Circuit vacated the EDTX infringement judgment. - **Damages ruling reversed**: Damages award also vacated. - **JMOL denial upheld**: The CAFC upheld the district court's denial of judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) on § 101 grounds, meaning the eligibility question must be resolved on remand rather than being dismissed outright. - **Jury instruction error**: The Federal Circuit remanded primarily due to erroneous jury instructions regarding the subject matter eligibility test under *Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank*. (IPWatchdog, June 9, 2026) ## Procedural Significance This is a precedential decision, meaning it establishes binding Circuit precedent on the interplay between § 101 jury instructions and post-trial JMOL standards. The case highlights ongoing uncertainty about how *Alice* eligibility should be presented to juries in patent trials. ## Strategic Implications - **Trial practitioners**: Erroneous *Alice* jury instructions can unwind an entire infringement and damages verdict, even after trial. - **Building automation sector**: The case keeps Ollnova's BAS patents alive but in an uncertain posture pending remand; ecobee and competitors face continued litigation risk. - **EDTX venue dynamics**: Despite Judge Albright's reported departure from WDTX, EDTX remains active for complex patent trials with significant reversal risk on appeal. - **Section 101 reform pressure**: Repeated CAFC remands on *Alice* jury instruction errors may fuel legislative momentum for § 101 clarity. ## Parties - **Ollnova Technologies Ltd.**: Patent holder focused on building automation systems. - **ecobee Technologies ULC**: Canadian smart thermostat and building automation company. ## Status Remanded to Eastern District of Texas for proceedings consistent with the CAFC opinion. (IPWatchdog, June 9, 2026)