Beyond patent eligibility, the court also found that the complaint failed to plausibly allege direct infringement. The plaintiffs did not clearly demonstrate how Uniswap’s publicly available code included the specific reserve ratio constant required under the asserted patents.

Claims of induced and willful infringement were also dismissed, as the court found no sufficient evidence that Uniswap had prior knowledge of the patents before the lawsuit. Although the ruling favors Uniswap for now, Bancor-affiliated entities still have the opportunity to revise and refile their claims — keeping the broader debate around DeFi innovation and intellectual property far from settled.