Motion Offense v. Dropbox: a $35.7 million patent demand defeated at trial

A Seventh Circuit decision (No. 25-1536, 171 F.4th 587, 5 May 2026) affirmed a district court's finding that one criminal defendant had consented, by accepting Dropbox's terms of service, to Dropbox's review of his files, writing that "The language of this contract unambiguously permits Dropbox to scan all files at its option". A petition for certiorari (Supreme Court No. 26-460) is pending, with the government's response due 7 December 2026.

Between March 2025 and April 2026 four patent-infringement complaints were filed against Dropbox in the District of Delaware, the Western District of Texas (two suits) and the Southern District of New York. Three were voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs within about seven weeks to three and a half months; the fourth, VE Opening, was transferred from Texas to California in July 2026 and is still open. The captured dockets do not show what any court decided on the merits; the VE Opening docket lists a motion for judgment on the pleadings and an order on it whose content was not captured.

Untested, single-source: Calcalist/CTech reported on 11 August 2026 that a senior physician at an Israeli hospital has sued the Dropbox entity registered in Ireland over an account that, according to the lawsuit, was blocked without prior warning, a hearing or an explanation. He denies ever storing the material Dropbox is said to have cited. None of it has been tested in court, Dropbox had not filed a response when the report appeared, and this entry rests on that one report.

A federal judge compelled the users suing over the 2024 Dropbox Sign breach into individual arbitration — finding that by clicking 'I agree' to sign a document they had accepted Dropbox's terms — and then denied reconsideration, effectively shutting the class action out of court.