Federal Circuit Dismisses JBS Hair's Appeal in the Pre-Stretched Braiding Hair Investigation on the Parties' Agreement.

The dismissal

In JBS Hair Inc. v. International Trade Commission, No. 2027-1016, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential order on October 20, 2026, stating that, the parties having so agreed, the proceeding is dismissed under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), and that each side shall bear its own costs. The order issued as the mandate the same day. The caption lists JBS Hair Inc. as appellant and the Commission as appellee, in an appeal from the Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-1457, which the Commission had terminated on August 6, 2026, with a finding of no violation.

The complaint and the patents

JBS Hair, Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia, filed its section 337 complaint with the Commission on July 3, 2025, and the Commission instituted the investigation, titled Certain Pre-Stretched Synthetic Braiding Hair and Packaging Therefor (II), on August 5, 2025, with notice published August 7, 2025. The complaint alleged violations based on the importation and sale of pre-stretched synthetic braiding hair and packaging that infringe claims 1 and 9-11 of U.S. Patent 10,786,026, claim 20 of U.S. Patent 10,945,478, claims 1, 4-9 and 11 of U.S. Patent 10,980,301, and claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent 12,127,616. JBS Hair asked for a general exclusion order, or in the alternative a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders. The notice of investigation described the accused products as "bundled synthetic braiding hair products."

JBS Hair Inc. is the applicant and assignee named on the face of each patent. The '026 patent, Synthetic Braiding Hair of Differing Lengths Packaged With a Cardioid, issued September 29, 2020, from an application filed December 15, 2016. The '478 patent, Packaged Synthetic Braiding Hair, issued March 16, 2021, and is a continuation-in-part of the application that became the '026 patent. The '301 patent, Packaged, Bundled Synthetic Braiding Hair Having Bundles of Differing Lengths, issued April 20, 2021, as a continuation of the '026 application, and the '616 patent, which has the same title and is a continuation of the '301 application, issued October 29, 2024.

The notice named 19 respondents: Sun Taiyang Co., Ltd. (d/b/a Outre), Hair Zone, Inc. (d/b/a Sensationnel), Beauty Essence, Inc. (d/b/a Supreme Hair US), SLI Production Corp. (d/b/a It's a Wig!), Mane Concept Inc., and Beauty Plus Trading Co., Inc. (d/b/a Janet Collection) of Moonachie, New Jersey; Beauty Elements Corporation (d/b/a Bijouz) of Miami Gardens, Florida; Royal Imex, Inc. (d/b/a Zury Hollywood) of Santa Fe Springs, California; GS Imports, Inc. (d/b/a Golden State Imports, Inc.) of Paramount, California; Eve Hair, Inc. of Lakewood, California; Midway International, Inc. (d/b/a BOBBI BOSS) of Cerritos, California; Mayde Beauty Inc., Model Model Hair Fashion, Inc., New Jigu Trading Corp. (d/b/a Harlem 125), and Shake N Go Fashion, Inc. of Port Washington, New York; Hair Plus Trading Co., Inc. (d/b/a Femi Collection) of Suwanee, Georgia; Optimum Solution Group LLC (d/b/a Oh Yes Hair) of Duluth, Georgia; Chade Fashions, Inc. of Niles, Illinois; and Amekor Industries, Inc. (d/b/a Vivica A. Fox Hair Collection) of Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also a party.

Before the final initial determination, the Commission declined to review an initial determination (Order No. 11, December 11, 2025) granting JBS Hair's motion to withdraw claims 9-11 of the '026 patent, claims 4-7, 9 and 11 of the '301 patent, and claims 12 and 13 of the '616 patent from the investigation. The Commission's notice of nonreview issued January 6, 2026.

The initial determination: infringement found, claims anticipated

The presiding administrative law judge issued the final initial determination on June 5, 2026, finding no violation of section 337. As the Commission's notice summarizes it, the final ID found the asserted claims of the '026, '301 and '616 patents infringed and practiced by JBS Hair's domestic industry products, but invalid as anticipated. It found the asserted claim of the '478 patent practiced by the domestic industry products, but not infringed and invalid as anticipated. It also found that JBS Hair satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement as to all asserted patents.

The ALJ's recommended determination on remedy and bonding recommended that, if the Commission found a violation, it issue a limited exclusion order rather than the general exclusion order JBS Hair requested, a cease and desist order only as to Hair Zone, and a bond of zero percent during the period of Presidential review. On June 8, 2026, the Commission asked the public and interested government agencies for comments on the public interest by July 7, 2026.

The Commission's determination

JBS Hair petitioned for review of the no-violation finding on June 17, 2026. On June 22, 2026, the respondents filed a contingent petition for review of certain findings, and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations petitioned for review of certain findings on the '478 patent. On August 6, 2026, the Commission determined to review the final ID in part. As to the '026, '301 and '616 patents, it reviewed the findings that the asserted claims are anticipated by the Asante Short Braid and Abuja Short Braid prior art references and, on review, took no position on anticipation by those references.

As to the '478 patent, the Commission reviewed the construction of the claim term "pre-stretched," the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement, and invalidity. On review, it affirmed the claim construction with supplemental reasoning, affirmed in part the invalidity findings on certain grounds with supplemental reasoning, took no position on the remaining invalidity grounds, and took no position on the technical prong. It also reviewed and took no position on the economic prong findings, declined to review the rest of the final ID, and adopted the final ID's findings to the extent they are not inconsistent with its own findings and opinion. The investigation was terminated with a finding of no violation of section 337.

What to watch next

The dismissal closes the appeal, and the order issued as the mandate the same day. Watch for any new enforcement by JBS Hair on these patents, whether in district court or in a new complaint at the Commission.