Patent Cases

13,576 decisions across India · European UPC · US PTAB

India 2,847 European UPC 2,007 US PTAB 8,722

Page 51 of 453

patent · Sep 19, 2025

Google LLC v.K.Mizra LLC

· IPR2025-01437

Google has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑20 of K.Mizra’s network‑quarantine patent, arguing obviousness over prior art (Freund, Ball, Pujare) and urging the Board to institute trial after a prior institution denial was deemed erroneous.
patent · Sep 19, 2025

Google LLC v.K.Mizra LLC

· IPR2025-01436

Google has filed an IPR petition challenging all 19 claims of K.Mizra’s ’705 patent covering network quarantine and remediation. The petition relies on obviousness over Freund, Ball, Pujare, and Lewis, and cites a Federal Circuit remand of a prior Cisco IPR.
patent · Sep 19, 2025

BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.

· IPR2025-01557

BOE Technology Group has filed an IPR petition challenging Samsung Display’s 7,279,708 OLED display patent. The petition argues that all asserted claims are obvious over four prior‑art references and urges the PTAB to institute the review.
patent · Sep 19, 2025

Bose Corporation v.IngenioSpec, LLC

· IPR2025-01548

Bose Corporation filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 20 claims of IngenioSpec’s ‘518 headset patent, arguing that each claim is obvious over a series of prior‑art headset references. The petition groups the challenges into multiple obviousness grounds covering the full claim set.
patent · Sep 19, 2025

Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

· IPR2025-01463

Harbor Freight, Generac and MWE have petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against Champion Power Equipment's 11,840,970 dual‑fuel generator patent. The petition alleges obviousness over numerous prior‑art references and challenges the claim language as means‑plus‑function under §112(f).
patent · Sep 19, 2025

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Marlin Semiconductor Limited et al.

· IPR2025-01444

TSMC has filed an IPR petition challenging Marlin Semiconductor’s U.S. 7,547,584 patent covering dummy openings for charge‑damage reduction in dual‑damascene processing. The petition asserts obviousness over six prior‑art references and seeks cancellation of claims 1‑6.
patent instituted · Sep 19, 2025

Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH v.Ellodi Pharmaceuticals

· PGR2025-00086

The PTAB granted institution for the PGR proceeding involving Dr. Falk Pharma and Ellodi Pharmaceuticals, allowing the challenge to move forward.
patent instituted · Sep 19, 2025

Imperative Care, Inc. v.Inari Medical, Inc. et al.

· IPR2025-01562

The USPTO granted institution for several Inter Partes Review proceedings after petitioners demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on their challenges. Other cases were denied based on discretionary or merits reviews.
patent instituted · Sep 19, 2025

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Marlin Semiconductor Limited et al.

· IPR2025-01444

The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01444, allowing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. to challenge the patent held by Marlin Semiconductor Limited et al., based on a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 18, 2025

Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd. a.o. v.Crystal Clear Codec Sp.z.o.o.

Munich (DE) Local Division · UPC-000345

The defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Crystal Clear Codec Sp.z.o.o. before the Local Division Munich requested a change of the language of proceedings from German to English under Rule 323 RoP. The claimant agreed to the change, and the President of the Court of First Instance ordered the language of proceedings changed to English, the language in which the patent EP2622601 was granted.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 18, 2025

Atlas Global Technologies GmbH v.TP-LINK Corporation Pte. Ltd. and Others

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000344

Atlas Global Technologies GmbH filed an infringement action and counterclaim for revocation concerning European Patents EP 3 353 901 and EP 3 186 937 against TP-LINK Corporation Pte. Ltd. and three related TP-LINK entities before the Local Chamber Düsseldorf. The defendants requested a stay of proceedings, and with the agreement of all parties, the court ordered the proceedings stayed pursuant to Rule 295(a) RoP until the EPO decision becomes final or the opposition appeal proceedings conclude.
patent · Sep 18, 2025

BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Paneltouch Technologies, LLC

· IPR2025-01483

BOE Technology filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 21 claims of Paneltouch's 2016 touchscreen display patent, arguing obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
patent · Sep 18, 2025

BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Paneltouch Technologies, LLC

· IPR2025-01482

BOE Technology Group has filed an IPR petition challenging Paneltouch Technologies' 8,704,762 display device patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over several prior‑art references covering crack‑detection wiring in touch and display panels.
patent pending · Sep 18, 2025

Kowa Company Ltd v.The Controller Of Patents & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 24560563

Kowa Company Ltd filed an appeal under Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970, challenging an order issued by The Controller of Patents & Anr. on May 14, 2025, concerning Patent Application No. 201717010446.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 17, 2025

Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. v.INDUSTRIEBETEILIGUNGS- UND BERATUNGS GMBH, BEGA CONSULT INTERNATIONALE HANDELSAGENTUR GMBH & CO. KG, BEGA BBK SP. Z O.O. SP. K.UL., and NEG NOVEX WHOLESALE COMPANY FOR ELECTRICAL AND BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING GMBH

The Hague (NL) Local Division · UPC-000350

Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. sought provisional measures before the Local Division The Hague against members of the BEGA group and NEG Novex, alleging infringement of European Patent EP 3 522 755 B1 relating to a cabinet for housing a washing machine at waist level. The defendants had previously been licensed to manufacture such cabinets, but the license was terminated effective 1 August 2024. The court found a reasonable likelihood of validity and infringement, sufficient urgency, and granted the provisional measures including a prohibition on manufacturing and selling the accused 'Laundreezy' and 'Respekta Clara' cabinets, recall orders, information obligations, and penalty payments, along with a cost award of EUR 62,600.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 17, 2025

Merz Therapeutics GmbH, Merz Pharmaceuticals LLC, and Merz Pharma France v.Viatris Santé

Paris (FR) Local Division · UPC-000349

This procedural order concerns an application for provisional measures filed by Merz entities against Viatris Santé regarding European Patent EP2377536 and its French Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) FR13C0033. Merz sought an order requiring Viatris to consolidate its 473-page Objection into a shorter document, arguing the disparity in submission lengths would deprive them of an equal opportunity to defend their case. The judge rapporteur found the 470-page objection inappropriate in the context of provisional measures and ordered Viatris to file a 70-page summary, with Merz permitted a 40-page reply.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 17, 2025

Ona Patents SL v.Apple Inc., Apple Distribution International Ltd., Apple Retail Germany B.V. & Co. KG, Apple GmbH, and Apple Retail France EURL (with Ekahau Oy as Counter-Defendant 2)

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000348

This order concerns the reimbursement of court fees following the withdrawal of both a patent infringement action and a counterclaim for revocation related to European Patent EP 2 263 098 B1. The Claimant (Ona Patents SL) withdrew its infringement action, and the Defendants (Apple entities) withdrew their counterclaim for revocation. The Düsseldorf Local Division ordered a 40% reimbursement of court fees paid in relation to the counterclaim for revocation, amounting to €8,000.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 17, 2025

Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. v.Wasombouw B.V., Industriebeteiligungs- und Beratungs GmbH, Bega Consult Internationale Handelsagentur GmbH & Co. KG, Bega BBK Sp. z o.o. Sp. K.ul., and NEG Novex Wholesale Company for Electrical and Building Services Engineering GmbH

The Hague (NL) Local Division · UPC-000347

This is a final procedural order of the Court of First Instance concerning provisional measures related to European Patent EP3522755, owned by Washtower IP B.V. Following a prior order of 11 September 2025, the applicants indicated their wish to enforce the injunctions, information order, penalty sums, and costs award against defendants 2-5. The Court confirmed receipt of security deposits totaling €50,000 and ordered electronic service of the final order on defendants 2-5, who had consented to service by email and waived their right to translations.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 17, 2025

InterDigital CE Patent Holdings, SAS v.The Walt Disney Company et al.

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000346

Procedural order issued by the Düsseldorf Local Division concerning European Patent No. 2 080 349 in a patent infringement action brought by InterDigital CE Patent Holdings, SAS against multiple Disney entities. The court exercised its discretion under Rule 37.2 RoP to decide the bifurcation question early, ordering that both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation be heard jointly, with the consent of the parties.
patent · Sep 17, 2025

Alvotech USA Inc. et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

· PGR2025-00085

Alvotech petitions the PTAB to invalidate Regeneron’s ’036 patent covering high‑dose aflibercept eye‑treatment formulations, alleging obviousness and lack of written description. The petition relies on multiple Regeneron disclosures and external prior art. The Board has yet to rule.
patent · Sep 17, 2025

SHENZHEN QIANFENYI INTELLIGENT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. v.Wacom Co. Ltd.

· IPR2025-01556

Shenzhen Qianfenyi (Maxeye) has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Wacom’s ’220 patent on active‑stylus communication, asserting that all challenged claims are anticipated or obvious over six prior‑art references.
patent · Sep 17, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.One-E-Way, Inc.

· IPR2025-01541

Samsung Electronics petitions the PTAB to institute an IPR against One‑E‑Way’s 9,107,000 patent covering wireless digital audio systems, challenging ten claims on priority and obviousness grounds.
patent instituted · Sep 17, 2025

Alvotech USA Inc. et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

· PGR2025-00085

The PTAB granted institution for the PGR proceeding (PGR2025-00085) involving Alvotech and Regeneron regarding patent 12168036. The petitioner met the likelihood of prevailing standard.
patent instituted · Sep 17, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.One-E-Way, Inc.

· IPR2025-01541

The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01541 after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. This decision moves the case forward to merits review.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 16, 2025

Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. v.MediaTek, Inc. and MediaTek Germany GmbH

Mannheim (DE) Local Division · UPC-000352

This is a procedural order from the Local Chamber Mannheim concerning an application by MediaTek Germany GmbH under Rule 190 of the Rules of Procedure for the production of license agreements referenced by Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. in the context of infringement proceedings regarding EP 3 567 731. The court partially granted the application, ordering Huawei to produce the license agreements it had identified on pages 2 and 3 of its August 15, 2025 submission with its reply to the statement of defense, while rejecting the request for two additional agreements and for ancillary agreements/amendments.
patent LITIGATION · Sep 16, 2025

Bodycap, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Université de Rennes v.European Patent Office

Luxembourg (LU) · UPC-000351

The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court rejected the appeal brought by the co-owners of EP 3 691 518 against the rejection of their request for unitary effect. The court confirmed that the one-month non-extendable deadline under Rule 7(3) of the Rules relating to Unitary Patent Protection (RPU) for remedying irregularities is mandatory and excluded from restitutio in integrum under Rule 22(6) RPU. The court also held that interlocutory revision by the EPO under Rule 91 RoP is excluded for expedited actions under Rule 97 RoP.
patent · Sep 16, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.One-E-Way, Inc.

· IPR2025-01540

Samsung Electronics has filed a petition for inter partes review of One‑E‑Way’s U.S. Patent 10,129,627 covering wireless digital audio spread‑spectrum technology, seeking cancellation of all twelve claims on priority and obviousness grounds.
patent · Sep 16, 2025

Hisense USA Corp. et al. v.Light Guide Innovations LLC

· IPR2025-01538

Hisense has filed an IPR petition challenging Light Guide Innovations' 8,267,537 patent covering LED backlight units. The petition asserts that the claims are obvious over prior art references Liu, Roberts, and Liu‑660, and establishes standing to proceed.
patent · Sep 16, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Redstone Logics LLC

· IPR2025-01532

Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging Redstone Logics’ ’339 patent covering multi‑core processor power management, seeking cancellation of ten claims as obvious over several pre‑AIA references.
patent instituted · Sep 16, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.One-E-Way, Inc.

· IPR2025-01540

The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01540 after reviewing the merits. The petitioner successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.
1 •••505152•••453
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 →