On May 17, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned a multi-million dollar patent infringement judgment against a major automobile manufacturer, holding that the plaintiff’s patent (for a method of identifying a customer’s parts requirements) was invalid because it was “anticipated” by prior art. The plaintiff is a notorious “patent troll,” a company that produces no products or services but instead devotes its energies to asserting rights under broadly worded patents it has acquired. The decision was a victory for WLF, which filed a brief urging that the patent be invalidated. WLF asserted that patent trolls such as the plaintiff are abusing the patent system by using it to shake down major corporations for settlements of dubious patent claims. In this case, the method patent claimed a “computerized” version of a well-known method for selling parts, such as automobile parts. Only Hyundai refused to settle by agreeing to the plaintiff’s demand for royalties.