Global Tubing LLC v. Tenaris Coiled Tubes LLC, Appeal Nos. 2023-1882, -1883 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 26, 2026)

In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit heard cross-appeals from a district court’s summary judgment decisions finding inequitable conduct by patentee Tenaris, but dismissing Global Tubing’s Walker Process attempted monopolization claim for lack of evidence.  The Court found genuine disputes of material fact precluded summary judgment on each, vacated both decisions, and remanded.

The case involved Tenaris’s patents on quenched-and-tempered coiled tubing, and Global Tubing’s theory that Tenaris procured and enforced these patents through fraud and used them anticompetitively.  A Walker Process claim requires proof that the patent was obtained by knowing and willful fraud on the PTO and was maintained or enforced with knowledge of that fraud, plus all elements of a Sherman Act § 2 monopolization or attempt claim.  Attempted monopolization requires predatory or anticompetitive conduct, specific intent to monopolize, and a dangerous probability of achieving monopoly power.  The Federal Circuit applies its own law to Walker Process issues and reviews summary judgment de novo.

Inequitable Conduct and Walker Process Prong One: Fraud on the PTO

The inequitable conduct judgment was vacated because although the record could support a finding that Tenaris withheld material prior art (the “CYMAX” Documents) with deceptive intent, it could also support a finding of no deceptive intent, and the district court had failed to draw all reasonable inferences from the facts in the record in Tenaris’s favor.  Supporting evidence included a comment from Dr. Valdez (one of the listed inventors) questioning disclosure of CYMAX, his mistaken view on carbon overlap, and debates over whether CYMAX was cumulative of other prior art that had previously been submitted to the PTO, all of which raised triable issues of fact for the jury on deceptive intent.

With respect to these same facts, the Federal Circuit also noted that the first prong of a Walker Process claim (that the defendant obtained its patent by knowing and willful fraud on the PTO) could be satisfied.

Walker Process Prong Two: Attempted Monopolization–Relevant Market and Market Power

However, the thrust of the Federal Circuit’s reasoning vacating the Walker Process decision was that the district court improperly based that decision on Tenaris being a “small market player” without first defining the relevant product and geographic market, which is a fact question central to the “dangerous probability” inquiry.  For example, Global Tubing had proposed a U.S. market limited to quenched-and-tempered coiled tubing, while Tenaris had proposed a worldwide market including conventional and stick-pipe tubing, and both sides offered evidence supporting their definitions.  The court also erred in suggesting any per se minimum market share.  The Federal Circuit cited Fifth Circuit precedent warning against a rigid “numbers game,” and a 29% share could support a finding of “dangerous probability of achieving a monopoly” depending on market conditions.  The Court also clarified that the proper time for assessing market power was when alleged misconduct began, not after market entry by another firm (which in this case were two years apart).

Walker Process Prong Three: Predatory or Anticompetitive Conduct and Intent

Finally, the Court found evidence existed from which a factfinder could conclude that Tenaris engaged in predatory conduct by threatening and preparing to sue Global Tubing on allegedly fraudulently procured patents.  A Global Tubing employee testified thatTenaris’s CTO said litigation was likely; customers inquired about impending suit;, and internal Tenaris communications discussed a legal battle and stopping “copy” products with patent rights.  Drawing reasonable inferences in Global Tubing’s favor, that evidence, combined with the disputed fraud procurement, precluded summary judgment for Tenaris on Global Tubing’s Walker Process claim.

The opinion can be found here.

By Jason Evans