Patent Cases

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

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

Page 76 of 424

patent · Sep 11, 2025

MediaTek Germany GmbH v.Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd.

Mannheim (DE) Local Division · UPC-000364

This provisional order concerns a confidentiality application filed by the defendants (MediaTek) in connection with their statement of defense in a patent infringement action involving EP 3 567 731. The defendants sought protection for technical information regarding the functioning of certain chips, particularly the implementation of an encoding algorithm, and requested that access be limited to a maximum of three named persons from the plaintiff's legal department. Huawei opposed the request, arguing the information was not protectable as it consisted merely of negative facts, and alternatively requested access for nine, six, or three named persons.
patent · Sep 11, 2025

Washtower v.INDUSTRIEBETEILIGUNGS- UND BERATUNGS GMBH et al

The Hague (NL) Local Division · UPC-000350

Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. (Applicants), proprietors of European Patent EP3522755B1 relating to cabinets for housing washing machines at waist level, sought provisional measures against several defendants from the BEGA furniture group and a related partner company. The application concerned alleged infringement of the patent by the defendants' manufacture and sale of competing washing machine cabinets. The Local Division The Hague issued an order on provisional measures following an oral hearing held on 14 August 2025, after the Applicants filed their application on 28 May 2025 and the parties exchanged submissions including objections, replies, and rejoinders.
patent defendant favorable · Sep 11, 2025

Saint Gobain Glass France v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 39134486

Saint Gobain Glass France appealed the refusal of its patent application (No. 201717045317), titled 'Material comprising a stack of thin layers', by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs. The refusal was based on lack of inventive step and non-patentability under Section 3(d). The High Court upheld the Controller's decision, finding that the claimed invention lacked technical advancement over prior art.
patent · Sep 10, 2025

Ona Patents SL v.Google Ireland Limited a.o.

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000367

This is a corrigendum order issued by the Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court on 10 September 2025, correcting a prior confidentiality order of 9 September 2025. The order classifies certain contract documents and internal company information related to the patent transfer chain, submitted by the Claimant Ona Patents SL in its brief dated 20 August 2025, as confidential. Access to the unredacted versions of the brief and exhibits KAP 21 to KAP 33 is restricted to authorized representatives and specified individuals on the Defendants' side.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 10, 2025

Nintendo Co., Ltd. et al. v.Malikie Innovations Ltd.

· IPR2026-00007

Nintendo and Malikie Innovations settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,542,571 B2 before trial, leading the Board to dismiss the petitions and terminate the proceedings.
patent · Sep 10, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Massively Broadband LLC

· IPR2026-00035

Samsung Electronics has filed an IPR petition challenging all 25 claims of Massively Broadband’s U.S. Patent 7,676,194 covering an ultrawideband broadband repeater. The petition asserts obviousness over a combination of prior‑art references including Ganz, Larrick, Engels, Perlman and Roese. The Board must decide whether to institute the review.
patent · Sep 10, 2025

Tesla, Inc. v.Perceptive Automata LLC

· IPR2025-01576

Tesla has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Perceptive Automata’s ’579 patent, arguing obviousness over multiple prior‑art neural‑network publications and that many claim limitations are unpatentable printed matter.
patent instituted · Sep 10, 2025

Tesla, Inc. v.Perceptive Automata LLC

· IPR2025-01576

The USPTO Board granted institution for six IPR proceedings, allowing them to proceed to the merits phase. This decision is part of a broader notice covering multiple institutional decisions.
patent pending · Sep 10, 2025

Mr Amit Arora Sole Proprietor M/S Hydro Valves v.The Controller General Of Patents Design and Trade Marks & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 164748862

The petitioner filed Rectification Petitions seeking cancellation of three 'MILTON' trademarks registered in Class 21. Respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding the pendency of earlier related rectification petitions before the Trade Marks Registry, Mumbai. The court satisfied this objection after the petitioner undertook to withdraw the relevant pending petitions.
patent mixed · Sep 10, 2025

Kamdhenu Steels And Alloys Limited v.Union Of India & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 16622664

The Delhi High Court heard a petition challenging an order directing a company to change its name based on alleged resemblance to another entity's brand. The core dispute revolved around whether the application for rectification was filed within the statutory three-year limitation period under Section 16(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 2013. While acknowledging the complexities of IP disputes between related entities, the Court granted a stay on the impugned order pending further arguments, allowing time to resolve the jurisdictional and temporal issues.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Google Commerce Limited, Google Ireland Limited v.Ona Patents SL

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000370

This is a confidentiality order issued by the Düsseldorf Local Division concerning EP 2 263 098 B1 in proceedings between Ona Patents SL (Claimant) and Google Ireland Limited and Google Commerce Limited (Defendants), with Ekahau Oy as Counter-defendant. The court dismissed the Defendants' request to limit the scope of the Claimant's confidentiality request, finding that the documents in question related to third parties bound by confidentiality clauses and internal business documents not fully disclosed to the public. The court also declined to permit disclosure of the confidential information to the District Court of Munich I in a parallel case between the same parties.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

ECOVACS Europe GmbH v.Respondent

Munich (DE) Local Division · UPC-000369

This is a procedural order concerning a request for extension of deadlines filed by Defendant 2 (ECOVACS Europe GmbH) in a patent infringement action brought by Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG. The plaintiff alleges infringement of European Patent EP 3 494 446 against four Ecovacs group entities in China, Germany, France, and the United States. Defendant 2 seeks to extend the deadline for filing its statement of defense and any counterclaim for invalidity until November 26, 2025, and the deadline for filing a Preliminary Objection until September 26, 2025, offering in return to facilitate service on the other three defendants to create a uniform deadline regime.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Oerlikon Textile GmbH & CO KG v.Respondent

Milan (IT) Local Division · UPC-000368

Divisione Locale di Milano DECISIONE del Tribunale Unificato dei Brevetti Tribunale di primo grado relativa al brevetto EP EP2145848 Attore in contraffazione e convenuto in nullità Oerlikon Textile GmbH & CO KG Leverkuser Strasse 65 - 42897 - Remscheid – DE Rappresentato dag
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Apple Inc. v.MyPort Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2025-01464

Apple’s IPR petition to invalidate MyPort’s 9,832,017 image‑tagging patent is met with a detailed preliminary response asserting that the prior art does not disclose a media data converter performing all claim functions. MyPort urges the Board to deny the petition and refuse to institute review.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Apple Inc. v.MyPort Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2025-01467

Court decision.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 9, 2025

TOP GLORY TRADING GROUP INC. et al. v.Cole Haan LLC et al.

· IPR2025-01395

Exhibit 2002 is a settlement agreement in IPR2025-01395 between Top Glory Trading Group Inc., DP Dream Pairs, Inc., and Cole Haan LLC concerning U.S. Patent No. 768969. The parties resolved the dispute, terminating the proceeding.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Apple Inc. v.MyPort Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2025-01465

Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging MyPort’s ’066 patent, asserting that claims 6‑17 are obvious over prior art references Spatharis, Manjunath, Fuller, and Jain. The petition seeks institution of the review to cancel the challenged claims.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Apple Inc. v.MyPort Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2025-01466

Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 6‑17 of MyPort’s ’067 patent, arguing they are obvious over Spatharis/Manjunath and Fuller/Jain. The petition requests institution of the proceeding and cancellation of the challenged claims.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Apple Inc. v.MyPort Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2025-01464

Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 6‑17 of MyPort’s ’017 patent, arguing they are obvious over prior‑art references Spatharis/Manjunath and Fuller/Jain. The petition references a prior IPR that was previously instituted and settled.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

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

· IPR2025-01527

TSMC has filed an IPR petition challenging all six claims of Marlin Semiconductor’s ’909 FinFET patent, asserting obviousness over Lin, Liaw, Chang, and Liu references. The petition argues that each claim element is disclosed in the prior art and that discretionary denial is unwarranted.
patent · Sep 9, 2025

Apple Inc. v.MyPort Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2025-01467

Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate MyPort’s ’998 patent covering media capture, encryption, and remote storage. The petition relies on Vataja, Cox, and Hershey references to argue obviousness of all 14 claims.
patent instituted · Sep 9, 2025

TOP GLORY TRADING GROUP INC. et al. v.Cole Haan LLC et al.

· IPR2025-01395

The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01395, allowing the challenge to proceed to merits review based on a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
patent interim order · Sep 9, 2025

Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated v.Deputy Controller Of Patents And Designs and Anr.

Calcutta High Court · 151070650

The petitioner, Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, filed an appeal against the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs. The court addressed a preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the matter raised by the respondent Controller.
patent plaintiff favorable · Sep 9, 2025

Novartis Ag & Anr. v.Novarise Pharmachem Private Limited

Delhi High Court - Orders · 21377926

The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of Novartis against Novarise Pharmachem Private Limited, addressing a trademark infringement dispute. The court found that the Plaintiffs had established a prima facie case regarding their registered trade mark 'NOVARTIS,' noting its extensive use and high goodwill in the pharmaceutical sector. Given the likelihood of consumer confusion between 'NOVARTIS' and 'NOVARISE,' the court restrained the defendant from manufacturing or selling products under the impugned mark until further hearing.
patent · Sep 8, 2025

HMD Global Oy v.Respondent

Hamburg (DE) Local Division · UPC-000374

The President of the Court of First Instance issued an order addressing HMD Global Oy's application to change the language of proceedings from German to English in an infringement action brought by Fraunhofer concerning European patent EP2609590. HMD Global Oy argued that the change was necessary for reasons of fairness, given that the evidence and annexes were predominantly in English, the defendant was based in a non-German-speaking country, and it communicated internally and with its representatives exclusively in English. Fraunhofer opposed the application. The order reflects a weighing of the parties' positions and the relevant circumstances of the case.
patent · Sep 8, 2025

ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LIMITED v.Respondent

Paris (FR) Local Division · UPC-000373

1 Division locale de Paris UPC_CFI_530/2025 Ordonnance de procédure du Tribunal de première instance de la Juridiction unifiée du brevet, rendue le 08/09/2025 Concernant la prorogation des délais (R. 9.3 RdP) REQUERANTS ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LIMITED (Parties à la procédure au principal - Dé
patent · Sep 8, 2025

TCL EUROPE SAS v.Respondent

Munich (DE) Central Division - Section · UPC-000372

TCL Europe SAS filed a revocation action against Corning Incorporated concerning European Patent EP 3 296 274 before the Central Division (Section Munich) of the Unified Patent Court. TCL sought a two-week extension of the deadline to file its reply to the Defence to Revocation and defence to the Application to amend, citing ongoing technical testing for prior art attacks. The Court rejected the application, finding that the Claimant had not demonstrated special circumstances justifying deviation from the standard two-month time period provided in the Rules of Procedure.
patent · Sep 8, 2025

Microsoft Corporation v.Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy

Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat · UPC-000371

Microsoft Corporation applied for an order treating certain information as strictly confidential in proceedings concerning European patent EP 2 671 173. The information in question consisted of invoices from Microsoft's law firm detailing hours spent on the case and fees agreed upon. The respondent objected, arguing no specific reason for confidentiality was provided and that cost specifications could not be considered trade secrets or attorney-client privileged. The Court granted Microsoft's application, holding that such information qualifies as confidential under Rule 262A RoP and falls within the scope of attorney-client privilege under Rule 287 RoP.
patent · Sep 7, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC

· IPR2025-01266

Samsung and Radian Memory Systems have reached a confidential settlement and jointly moved to terminate the IPR on patent 11,544,183, arguing that early termination serves public policy and conserves resources.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 7, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC

· IPR2025-01266

Samsung and Radian settled the IPRs covering patent 11,544,183 before trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement documents to remain confidential.
1 •••757677•••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 →