US PTAB IP Litigation

Apple Inc. v.Varia Holdings LLC

· IPR2024-01363

Apple’s IPR against Varia Holdings’ RFID‑emulation patent resulted in a Final Written Decision finding all 32 claims unpatentable. Varia now seeks Director Review, arguing the Board relied on an unsupported "functional emulation" theory introduced only in the Reply.

FUJIFILM Corporation et al. v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC

· IPR2024-01374

Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC and Olympus Corporation have reached a settlement-in-principle in a Texas district court case, planning to file a stipulation of dismissal and requesting a 45‑day stay of deadlines.

Altice USA, Inc. et al. v.Touchstream Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2024-01263

Altice USA filed an unopposed motion to withdraw its IPR against Touchstream's streaming patent, arguing the case is still in the preliminary stage and withdrawal would save resources. The patent owner does not object, and the Board has yet to rule.

3Shape A/S et al. v.Medit Corporation et al.

· IPR2024-01260

3Shape and Medit have filed a joint request with the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement confidential under 35 U.S.C. §317. The motion seeks to separate the agreement from the patent file and limit its disclosure.

Google LLC v.DH International Ltd.

· IPR2024-01322

DH International Ltd. filed a Director Review request in IPR2024-01322 against Google LLC. The petitioner has five business days to file a concise response, and no new evidence is allowed.

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. et al. v.RavenWhite Security, Inc.

· IPR2024-01316

Home Depot and RavenWhite Security settled their inter partes review of U.S. Patent 10,594,823. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate the IPR after institution, and the Board granted the termination while keeping the settlement confidential.

3Shape A/S et al. v.Medit Corporation et al.

· IPR2024-01260

3Shape and Medit have settled their dispute and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR for patent 7,912,257. The motion cites settlement, lack of a preliminary response, and no institution decision as grounds for termination.

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. et al. v.RavenWhite Security, Inc.

· IPR2024-01316

The PTAB denied Home Depot's request for Director Review of the institution decisions in two IPRs, leaving the institution of RavenWhite Security's patents intact.

Google LLC v.DH International Ltd.

· IPR2024-01322

The PTAB denied Google LLC's request for Director Review of the institution decision in IPR2024-01322, leaving the institution of patent 9,022,294 B2 in place.

LEDUP MANUFACTURING GROUP LTD. v.Seasonal Specialties, LLC

· IPR2024-01259

LEDup Manufacturing filed a Notice of Appeal challenging the PTAB’s decision that dependent claims 3 and 8 of the ’794 patent remain patentable. The appeal targets the Board’s claim‑construction and other adverse rulings, and is now before the Federal Circuit.

Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.

· IPR2024-01351

Dyson and Omachron have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,776,120 and jointly request the Board to terminate the proceeding while keeping the settlement agreement confidential.

Tableau Software, LLC et al. v.iCharts LLC

· IPR2024-01388

The USPTO Director denied Tableau Software’s request for review of the institution denial in IPR2024-01388, leaving the original decision intact. No new arguments or evidence altered the Board’s assessment.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.NL Giken Inc.

Amazon and its affiliates settled the IPR against NL Giken over U.S. Patent 9,948,968. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate, treating the settlement as confidential. The proceeding is now closed.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.NL Giken Inc.

Amazon and its affiliates jointly filed a motion to terminate IPR2024-01345 after reaching a confidential settlement with patent holder NL Giken. The motion cites public‑policy reasons favoring settlement and requests Board approval to end the proceeding.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.NL Giken Inc.

Amazon’s petition for Director Review of the institution decision on NL Giken’s patent 9,948,968 was denied, leaving the institution intact.

Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC

· IPR2024-01253

The PTAB denied Hulu's petition to institute an IPR against Piranha Media's eSports event platform patent, citing a prior district‑court §101 invalidity ruling and efficiency concerns.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.NL Giken Inc.

Amazon files a response defending the PTAB’s institution of its IPR against NL Giken, arguing the Board’s claim constructions are correct and discretionary denial is inappropriate.

Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC

· IPR2024-01253

Hulu seeks Director Review of two instituted IPRs covering its streaming‑technology patent after a district court ruled the claims invalid under §101. The patent owner argues the Board should deny institution under Fintiv and the Trial Practice Guide, and stay the proceedings.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable

Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. v.MHL Custom, Inc.

· IPR2024-01391

Bombardier Recreational Products and MHL Custom settled their inter partes review, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding. The settlement agreement was deemed confidential and kept separate from the patent record.

Deltran USA LLC et al. v.The Noco Company

· IPR2024-01219

The PTAB held that all seven claims of The Noco Company's portable jump‑starter patent are unpatentable, finding them obvious over prior‑art jump‑starter and USB‑charging references. The decision follows a petition by Deltran USA LLC asserting obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable

Deltran USA LLC et al. v.The Noco Company

· IPR2024-01219

The PTAB held that all eight challenged claims of the Noco Company’s jump‑starter patent are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references, rendering them unpatentable.

Tableau Software, LLC et al. v.iCharts LLC

· IPR2024-01388

iCharts LLC submits an authorized response urging the PTAB Director to deny Tableau Software’s request for Director Review of the institution decision that denied an IPR on patent 9,712,595. The brief argues the dissent does not create a reasonable likelihood of success and that the Board’s findings on the prior art were correct.

NormShield Inc. (d/b/a Black Kite Inc.) v.BitSight Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2024-01395

NormShield and BitSight reached a confidential settlement, leading the PTAB to terminate four inter partes review proceedings before institution.