Federal Circuit Rule 36: What a One-Word Affirmance Means

Rule 36 lets the Federal Circuit affirm without a written opinion. It ends that appeal for the appellees, but it does not create precedential reasoning you can cite like an opinion, and it does not decide every issue in a related district case.

Federal Circuit Rule 36 permits a judgment of affirmance without opinion when the rule's conditions are met and an opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment affirms the result under review without providing written reasoning. Read it as the lower result standing, and identify precisely which judgment or order was appealed.

What Rule 36 does

Affirms the judgment or order presented for review.
A Rule 36 judgment supplies no written reasoning to treat as a precedential holding.
Can cover appeals from district courts (for example, a preliminary-injunction denial) and from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (for example, an IPR final written decision).

What Rule 36 does not do

It does not write new claim-construction or validity doctrine you can quote as the court's reasoning.
It does not automatically end every related district-court case or every patent claim outside the appeal.
It does not mean the court agreed with every sentence in the board or district opinion; it means the judgment under review is affirmed.

Board examples on this site

Recent tracker and board matters show both flavors. In DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Apple also appellee), Nos. 2025-1263, 2025-1264, and 2025-1265 (Fed. Cir. Sep. 15, 2026), the court affirmed PTAB final written decisions under Rule 36 on IPRs tied to U.S. Patents 8,020,083, 8,510,407, and 9,369,545. In ABC IP, LLC and Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. v. Peak Tactical LLC, No. 2026-1527 (Fed. Cir. Sep. 15, 2026), the court affirmed under Rule 36 the District of Wyoming's denial of a preliminary injunction. Those pages explain the dockets; this breakout explains the procedural label.

How to use this on a busy morning

If the tracker shows a Rule 36 move, ask two questions: what exact judgment was affirmed, and what still remains in any parallel district or board matter. Then open the linked analysis for patents, claims, and the next procedural beat.

What to watch next

Watch for further Rule 36 judgments on this board, any precedential opinions that cover the same doctrine in a written decision, and district or PTAB follow-on practice after the mandate issues.