Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky
In IQE PLC v. Newport Fab, LLC (doing business as Jazz Semiconductor, Tower Holdings, and others), the Federal Circuit addressed when a party can immediately appeal the denial of an anti-SLAPP motion in a patent-related trade secret case. The case centered on IQE’s claim that Tower misappropriated its trade secrets by filing patent applications (including U.S. Patent No. 11,164,740 and others) that allegedly disclosed confidential porous silicon technology shared under a non-disclosure agreement.
The key issue was whether Tower could immediately appeal the district court’s denial of its anti-SLAPP motion to strike IQE’s California state law claims. Anti-SLAPP laws are designed to quickly dismiss lawsuits that target a party’s exercise of free speech or petition rights—here, the act of filing patent applications. The Federal Circuit held that, under California law, the denial of such a motion is immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine, which allows certain important legal questions to be reviewed before a case is fully resolved.
Importantly, the Federal Circuit found that the district court made a mistake by considering whether Tower actually misappropriated trade secrets at the first step of the anti-SLAPP analysis. Instead, the court should have only determined whether IQE’s claims arose from Tower’s protected activity—namely, the filing of patent applications. Whether Tower’s actions were wrongful should only be considered at the second step, after it’s established that the claims are based on protected activity.
This decision clarifies the procedure for handling anti-SLAPP motions in federal court when patent filings are involved, reinforcing that the act of filing a patent application is generally protected activity. The case was sent back to the district court for further proceedings, but the Federal Circuit’s guidance will shape how similar disputes are handled in the future.