US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 103 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Tecan Group AG
· IPR2025-00015
Integrated DNA Technologies filed an authorized response to a USPTO Director Review request, defending the Board’s institution of an IPR on its DNA‑sequencing patent and arguing no abuse of discretion occurred.
patent instituted
CrowdStrike, Inc. et al. v.GoSecure, Inc.
· IPR2025-00070
The USPTO Director denied CrowdStrike's request for a review of the institution decision in IPR2025-00070, leaving the institution of GoSecure's patent 9,954,872 B2 in place. No substantive patentability issues were addressed.
patent instituted
CrowdStrike, Inc. et al. v.GoSecure, Inc.
· IPR2025-00070
CrowdStrike filed a response defending the Board’s decision to institute two parallel IPRs against GoSecure’s cybersecurity patent, emphasizing proper claim constructions for “association” and “computer system.” The petitioner argues the Board’s reasoning aligns with precedent and that the prior‑art reference Capalik renders the claims obvious.
patent terminated or settled
Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al. v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al.
· IPR2025-00009
Lenovo and Ericsson have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,972,654 and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR. The Board has not yet instituted the review, and the parties seek dismissal under 35 U.S.C. §317.
patent terminated or settled
Nokia of America Corporation et al. v.Woodbury Wireless, LLC
· IPR2025-00048
Nokia, AT&T and T‑Mobile have settled their IPR dispute with Woodbury Wireless over U.S. Patent 9,496,930. The parties filed a joint motion to keep the settlement confidential and to terminate the proceeding.
patent terminated or settled
Runergy Alabama Inc et al. v.Trina Solar Co. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00007
Trina Solar, Evervolt and petitioners have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,722,104, filing a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review. The Board has not yet decided the merits, allowing termination under 35 U.S.C. §317.
patent terminated or settled
Google LLC et al. v.Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00061
Google and Motorola settled their IPR dispute with Multifold over U.S. Patent 9,792,007 B2. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and ordered the settlement agreements kept confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Motorola Mobility LLC et al. v.Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00041
Motorola Mobility, Google and Multifold International have resolved their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,058,153 and filed a joint motion to terminate the IPR. The parties submitted covenants not to sue and seek early termination for judicial economy.
patent
Roku, Inc. v.VideoLabs, Inc.
· IPR2025-00071
Roku and VideoLabs have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,440,559 and jointly request that the settlement be kept confidential and the proceeding terminated.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2025-00002
Samsung successfully challenged Netlist’s 8,489,837 patent in an IPR, leading the PTAB to find all five asserted claims unpatentable as obvious over prior art. The Board rejected the patent owner’s constructions and upheld Samsung’s obviousness arguments.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2025-00001
Netlist seeks Director review to overturn the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against its 11,386,024 patent, arguing Samsung’s record is overly voluminous and its six grounds lack particularity. The petition urges denial of institution and referral to district court.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2025-00001
The PTAB held that Samsung Electronics' IPR against Netlist’s 8,489,837 B1 patent succeeded, finding claims 1‑3,5,6 unpatentable as obvious over prior‑art references LeClerg, Lee, and Kim. The Board adopted the petitioner’s claim constructions and rejected the patent owner’s arguments.
patent denied
Nokia of America Corp. et al. v.Pegasus Wireless Innovation LLC
· IPR2025-00037
The USPTO Director denied the petition by Nokia and other telecom carriers to review the PTAB’s decision denying institution of IPRs against Pegasus Wireless Innovation’s patents.
patent
CrowdStrike, Inc. et al. v.GoSecure, Inc.
· IPR2025-00068
GoSecure has submitted a Director Review request for IPR2025-00068, prompting CrowdStrike to file a concise, evidence‑free response within five business days.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2025-00001
The PTAB found all 29 claims of Netlist's ’623 memory module patent unpatentable, deeming them obvious over a combination of prior art references including Hazelzet, Buchmann, and Talbot. Samsung, as petitioner, secured a complete cancellation of the patent claims.
patent terminated or settled
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01507
Amazon and Nokia settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 8,996,693. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and partially treated the settlement documents as confidential.
patent
Google LLC et al. v.Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00061
Google and Motorola jointly filed a request to keep their settlement agreements with Multifold International confidential under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). The parties seek to have the covenants not to sue treated as business confidential information and excluded from the public patent file.
patent terminated or settled
Roku, Inc. v.VideoLabs, Inc.
· IPR2025-00072
Roku and VideoLabs settled their inter partes review dispute over U.S. Patent 7,233,790, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before institution.
patent
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01507
Amazon and Nokia have settled their dispute over Nokia’s patent 8,996,693 and jointly moved to terminate the IPR, requesting that the settlement be kept confidential under 35 U.S.C. § 317 and related regulations.
patent denied
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
The USPTO denied Samsung and Google's request for rehearing of the Director Review decision in IPR2025-00018, leaving the earlier institution order in place.
patent terminated or settled
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01505
Amazon and Nokia have settled their dispute over a Nokia wireless‑technology patent and jointly moved to terminate the IPR, requesting that the settlement be kept confidential.
patent
Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Tecan Group AG
· IPR2024-01506
Tecan Genomics objected to the evidentiary exhibits submitted by Integrated DNA Technologies in the IPR proceeding, citing multiple Federal Rules of Evidence violations and lack of relevance as prior art.
patent denied
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.B.S.D. Crown, Ltd.
· IPR2025-00057
The PTAB denied Amazon’s request for Director Review, upholding its claim‑construction analysis and finding no error in the denial of institution.
patent
Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Tecan Group AG
· IPR2024-01502
Integrated DNA Technologies filed an authorized response to a Director Review request, defending the institution of its IPR against Tecan’s challenges and arguing that the Board acted properly. The petition emphasizes the legitimacy of expert testimony and rejects the patent owner’s procedural objections.
