Patent Cases

12,714 decisions across India · European UPC · US PTAB

India 4,909 European UPC 2,185 US PTAB 5,620

Page 44 of 424

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jan 9, 2026

Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC

· IPR2026-00099

Google successfully challenged Secure Communication Technologies’ patent covering proximity‑based wireless information exchange. The PTAB found all fifteen challenged claims unpatentable under §§102 and 103, based on the Eagle prior art.
patent · Jan 9, 2026

Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC

· IPR2026-00099

Google petitions the PTAB to invalidate a wireless‑communication patent, arguing that its claims are anticipated or obvious over earlier Bluetooth‑based systems such as Eagle and Mgrdechian.
patent · Jan 9, 2026

Citadel Securities LLC v.HFT Solutions, LLC

· IPR2026-00212

Citadel Securities petitions the PTAB to invalidate six claims of HFT Solutions’ ’286 patent, alleging that the FPGA‑PLL synchronization method is fully disclosed in Altera’s white paper, the Stratix Handbook, the Si5345 manual, and a 2012 Lockwood paper.
patent · Jan 9, 2026

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc. et al.

· IPR2026-00193

Amazon has filed an IPR petition challenging InterDigital’s ’876 patent covering large‑block intra‑prediction in video codecs. The petition asserts obviousness over Xiong, VCEG‑AJ21, and H.264, seeking cancellation of claims 1‑18.
patent plaintiff favorable · Jan 9, 2026

Kapil Goyal v.The Registrar Of Trade Marks

Delhi High Court · 115818929

Kapil Goyal appealed the refusal by The Registrar of Trade Marks to register the mark 'DOUBLE-CHOICE' under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The initial rejection was based on the mark being non-distinctive and descriptive. The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the reasoning for deeming the mark descriptive was unfounded, especially since the application was filed on a proposed-to-be-used basis.
patent defendant favorable · Jan 9, 2026

Trutech Machinery v.Controller of Patents & Anr.

Bombay High Court · 66312084

Trutech Machinery challenged the Assistant Controller's order allowing a patent application for an improved round corner cutting machine. The Petitioner raised objections under Section 25, including anticipation and lack of inventive step. The Court found no legal error in the summary inquiry conducted by the Controller and directed the Petitioner to seek revocation under Section 64.
patent remanded · Jan 9, 2026

Steigerwald Arzneimittlewerk Gmbh v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs

Delhi High Court · 109572840

The Appellant challenged the Assistant Controller's refusal to grant a patent application (No. 1285/DEL/2009) on grounds of lack of novelty and inventive step. The invention relates to a method for producing a plant-based medicament, Iberogast, which requires a specific mixing sequence for stable quality. The High Court found infirmities in the Controller's order regarding the reasoning under Sections 3(d) and 3(e), setting aside the Impugned Order and remanding the matter.
patent plaintiff favorable · Jan 9, 2026

Mankind Pharma Limited v.Registrar Of Trade Marks

Delhi High Court · 187361253

Mankind Pharma Limited appealed the Registrar of Trade Marks' refusal to register its subject trade mark, 'PETKIND', citing similarity to a prior application. The Appellant argued that their extensive use and established goodwill with marks containing 'KIND' should qualify them for higher protection. The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection order.
patent pending · Jan 9, 2026

Nadeem Majid Oomerbhoy v.Sh. Gautam Tank And Ors.

Delhi High Court · 25780356

The suit was filed seeking permanent injunction against Defendants for infringing the registered Trade Mark 'POSTMAN', used for refined groundnut oil. The Plaintiffs contended that despite a temporary discontinuation, they had not abandoned the mark and it held substantial goodwill. While some issues were decided in favor of the Plaintiffs (including granting an injunction), the court recalled its previous pronouncement and directed the suit to remain pending for further determination on damages.
patent · Jan 8, 2026

Primetals Technologies Austria GmbH v.Danieli & C. S.p.A.

Milan (IT) Local Division · UPC-000136

Primetals Technologies Austria GmbH filed an application under Rule 190 of the Rules of Procedure seeking an order requiring Danieli & C. S.p.A. to produce documents and technical information relating to a plant built by Danieli for Hoa Phat Group in Vietnam, allegedly infringing EP 2 624 977. The Milan Local Division rejected the application as inadmissible and unfounded, finding that Primetals had likely known of the plant since at least July 2024 due to its long-standing commercial relationship with Hoa Phat, and that the photographs and technical analysis provided were insufficient to substantiate the infringement allegation.
patent pending · Jan 8, 2026

Saint Gobain Tm Kk v.Assistant Controller Opf Patents And Designs

Delhi High Court - Orders · 95828216

Saint Gobain Tm Kk filed an appeal before the Delhi High Court challenging an order issued by the Assistant Comptroller of Patents and Designs regarding patent application no. 201717018424. The court accepted notice and granted time for the respondent to file written submissions, listing the case for further hearing.
patent · Jan 7, 2026

Microsoft Corporation v.Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy

Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat · UPC-000137

This case concerns an infringement action filed by Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy against Microsoft Corporation regarding European patent EP 2 671 173, which relates to a system for mobile Internet browsing using location data. Microsoft Corporation filed a counterclaim for revocation, and Suinno applied to amend the patent in response. The Court addressed the procedural requirements and admissibility criteria for such amendment applications, distinguishing between objective requirements (filing deadline, inclusion of at least one amendment, use of the official language) and matters of judicial discretion (clarity, sufficiency of explanation, reasonableness of number of amendments).
patent pending · Jan 7, 2026

Largan Precision Co. Ltd v.Motorola Mobility India Limited And Ors

Delhi High Court - Orders · 130323963

Largan Precision Co. Ltd filed a suit seeking an interim injunction and disclosure of sales against Motorola Mobility India Limited for alleged infringement of Indian Patent No. TN 395095. The court allowed notice to the defendants and listed the matter for further consideration.
patent · Jan 6, 2026

Angelalign Technology Inc., Angelalign France Technology SASU, Europe Angelalign Technology B.V., Angelalign Technology (Germany) GmbH, Italy Angelalign Technology S.R.L., Shanghai EA Medical Instruments Co., Ltd. v.Align Technology, Inc.

Luxembourg (LU) · UPC-000138

Angelalign sought discretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP) of a procedural order issued by the Local Division Düsseldorf in provisional measures proceedings concerning EP 4 346 690, which had disregarded certain non-infringement arguments and exhibits from Angelalign's Rejoinder. The Court of Appeal, sitting as a standing judge, dismissed the request, finding that Angelalign had failed to substantiate why the impugned order was manifestly erroneous and that allowing the request would disrupt the scheduled first-instance oral hearing.
patent remanded · Jan 6, 2026

OCV Intellectual Capital Llc v.The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks

Calcutta High Court · 12488551

The appeal challenged the rejection of a patent application for a high-performance glass fiber composition that achieves S-glass properties at a lower manufacturing cost. The Controller rejected it based on lack of novelty, inventive steps, and non-patentable subject matter. The High Court set aside the rejection order, finding that the Controller failed to consider key arguments regarding technical advancement and synergistic effect.
patent pending · Jan 6, 2026

Natco Pharma Limit v.Novo Nordisk A/S And Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 34944145

The petitioner, Natco Pharma Limit, filed a petition seeking the revocation of Indian Patent No. 262697 before the Delhi High Court. The court issued notice to the respondents and directed them to file replies within six weeks.
patent pending · Jan 6, 2026

Kba Notasys Sa v.Controller General Of Patents, Designs and Trademarks and Anr

Delhi High Court - Orders · 143664973

The appellant, Kba Notasys Sa, challenged an impugned order issued by the Controller General of Patents. The appellant argued that the Controller failed to apply established guidelines for determining inventive step and did not properly assess the invention described in their drawings. The respondent contended that the claimed invention was not patentable as it was covered by existing prior art.
patent · Jan 5, 2026

Nera Innovations Ltd. v.Xiaomi Comunication Co., Ltd a.o.

Hamburg (DE) Local Division · UPC-000139

This case concerns an application for a cost decision (Rule 151 RoP) filed by Nera Innovations Ltd. following appeal proceedings under Rule 220.2 RoP against an order of the Hamburg Local Chamber dated 24 April 2024, which had rejected the claimant's request to serve Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd. and Xiaomi Inc. through their German subsidiary. The court addressed the scope of reimbursable representation costs, the number of authorized representatives required, and the recovery of travel expenses for oral hearings. The decision establishes that appeal proceedings on specific procedural issues do not require more than one authorized representative and that the standard ceiling of reimbursable representation costs does not apply to such procedural appeals.
patent interim order · Jan 5, 2026

Maj (Retd.) Sukesh Behl Proprietor, M/S Pearl Engineering Company & Anr. v.Koninklijke Philips Nv

Delhi High Court · 86930136

The appeals challenged the Single Judge's decree awarding substantial damages against the appellants (Maj Retd. Sukesh Behl & Anr.) for infringing Patent IN 2182555 held by Koninklijke Philips Nv. The court adjudicated applications seeking stay of execution of this judgment and decree.
patent plaintiff favorable · Jan 5, 2026

Ipca Laboratories Limited v.Anrose Pharma

Bombay High Court · 124492641

The suit was filed alleging infringement and passing off concerning the Plaintiff's registered trade mark ZERODOL. The Plaintiff argued that the Defendant's use of 'ZEROVOL-P' was deceptively similar, confusingly misleading, and aimed at capitalizing on the Plaintiff's goodwill in medicinal preparations. Given the Defendant failed to contest the suit despite being served, the Court decreed the suit.
patent defendant favorable · Jan 5, 2026

Steer Engineering Private Limited v.Joint Controller of Patents and Designs

Madras High Court · 37899286

The appeal was filed against the Joint Controller's order refusing to grant a patent for a fiber reinforced thermoplastic composition. The respondent argued that the amended claims were already covered by the parent application and did not meet statutory requirements, citing prior art.
patent plaintiff favorable · Jan 5, 2026

Automat Irrigation Pvt. Ltd. v.Aquestia Limited

Delhi High Court · 150698168

Automat Irrigation Pvt. Ltd. appealed a Single Judge's decision which held that its product, Hydromat Valve (an FCV), infringed Patent IN 4270503 of Aquestia Limited. The appellate court found errors of principle in the lower judgment regarding claim interpretation and fundamental differences in technology between the two valves.
patent defendant favorable · Jan 5, 2026

E.R.Squibb & Sons Llc v.Union of India

Madras High Court · 44964329

E.R.Squibb & Sons LLC challenged the recommendation made by the Opposition Board regarding Patent No. IN340060, arguing that the board failed to consider crucial evidence submitted by the patentee during post-grant opposition proceedings initiated by Zydus Healthcare Limited. The Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that since the recommendation is only a suggestion for the Patent Authority, the petitioner could raise these objections during the final decision-making process or appeal.
patent · Dec 31, 2025

Google LLC v.Gamba Group Holdings LLC

· IPR2026-00156

Google LLC filed an IPR petition against Gamba Group Holdings LLC’s 9,772,193 patent covering Bluetooth and GPS‑based parking‑location methods. The petition asserts anticipation by Baese and Phillips and obviousness with Phillips and Soliman, seeking cancellation of claims 12, 13, and 15‑18. The Board has not yet ruled on institution.
patent · Dec 30, 2025

Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI) v.Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co, Ltd a.o.

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000142

A patent infringement action concerning European patent EP 3258692 was filed by Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI) against eight defendants, including Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and related entities. The claimant subsequently applied to withdraw the action against all defendants before the closure of the written procedure. The Düsseldorf Local Division permitted the withdrawal, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of 60% of the court fees to the claimant.
patent · Dec 30, 2025

PAPST LICENSING GmbH & Co v.EPO

Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat · UPC-000141

1 Paris Central Division Entscheidung des Gerichts erster Instanz des Einheitlichen Patentgerichts UPC_CFI_1771/2025 betreffend das EP 3 327 608 erlassen am 30. Dezember 2025 LEITSÄTZE: 1. Das Einheitliche Patentgericht wendet gemäß Art. 1 Abs. 2, Art. 20 des Übereinkommens üb
patent · Dec 30, 2025

Microsoft Corporation v.Qomplx LLC

· IPR2026-00184

Microsoft has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate Qomplx’s multi-factor authentication patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over the Kirti patent and the Coffin textbook. The petition seeks institution of IPR on claims 1‑21, 23‑28, and 30.
patent · Dec 30, 2025

Guardant Health, Inc. v.Tempus AI, Inc.

· IPR2026-00185

Guardant Health filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 18 claims of Tempus AI’s 10,991,097 patent, asserting anticipation by Chukka and obviousness over Chukka combined with Jones, Sebastiao, and Gallas. The petition argues the prior art was not considered during prosecution.
patent · Dec 30, 2025

Microsoft Corporation v.Qomplx LLC

· IPR2026-00182

Microsoft has filed a petition for inter partes review of Qomplx’s U.S. Patent 12,218,934 covering contextual, risk‑based multi‑factor authentication. The petition asserts that claims 1‑30 are obvious over prior art including the Kirti patent, the Coffin textbook, and Vemulapalli’s virtual‑machine teachings. No objective evidence of non‑obviousness is presented.
patent · Dec 29, 2025

Align Technology, Inc. v.Angelalign Technology Inc. a.o.

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000146

This is a procedural order from the Düsseldorf Local Division concerning an application for provisional measures based on European Patent EP 4 346 690 B1. The Defendants sought leave to appeal a prior procedural order of 16 December 2025, which had directed the Court to disregard non-infringement arguments submitted in the Defendants' Rejoinder. The Court denied leave to appeal, finding that the order was a valid exercise of its procedural discretion under Rules 9 and 209.1(a) RoP and was closely connected to the specific circumstances of the case.
1 •••434445•••424
Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Dealing with a patent challenge?

Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.

Talk to our patent team →