The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued this decision, not the Ninth Circuit court that handles appeals from California.<p>The CAFC is the patent appeals court and takes this case because there were patent issues in addition to the copyright issues. The result is that the decision doesn't have the precedential force in the Ninth Circuit that a real Ninth Circuit decision would. It has little or no precedential force in any US court since the CAFC doesn't routinely take copyright cases.<p>Being the patent appeals court, the CAFC is captured by the patent bar and known for corruption, IP maximalism, ignoring Supreme Court precedents, and being regularly overturned by the Supreme Court, often in 9-0 decisions. [0] The best evidence that specialized single-subject appeals courts are harmful to justice is the CAFC's abuses. Another decision to harm the software industry by a court that is on a crusade to make software illegal is hardly a surprise. Google should consider a petition for Supreme Court review.<p>OP is right, of course, that Google and Android are still looking fine in this case.<p>[0] <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/how-a-rogue-appea." rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/how-a-rogue-appea...</a>.