US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 118 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent terminated or settled
Nikon Corporation et al. v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC
· IPR2024-01373
Nikon and other camera makers settled with Optimum Imaging Technologies, leading the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review of patent 7,612,805. The settlement agreement is kept confidential under statutory provisions.
patent instituted
Deltran USA LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
· IPR2024-01219
The PTAB granted institution of an IPR against The Noco Company's 11,584,243 B2 jump‑starter patent. The petitioner, Deltran USA LLC, persuaded the Board that at least one claim is likely unpatentable based on obviousness over combinations such as Richardson + Zhao. All eight challenged claims are now subject to trial.
patent
Motorola Solutions, Inc. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
· IPR2024-01285
The PTAB sent an email notifying the parties that the patent owner has filed Director Review requests for IPR2024‑01284, ‑01285, ‑01313 and ‑01314. The petitioner may file a limited response within five business days, with no new evidence allowed.
patent
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
· IPR2024-01310
The PTAB Director has issued a Director Review request for IPR2024-01310. Genius Sports Ltd. must submit a concise response within five business days, and no new evidence may be introduced.
patent denied
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd et al. v.Secure Wi-Fi LLC
· IPR2024-01367
Secure Wi‑Fi LLC defended the PTAB’s denial of institution against Samsung’s request for Director review, arguing the Board’s use of Fintiv factors was proper and the petitioner’s new arguments untimely. The Board’s decision stands.
patent denied
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01253
The PTAB denied Hulu’s petition to institute inter partes review of Piranha Media’s eSports patent, finding the petition failed the compelling merits standard. No claims were instituted or found unpatentable.
patent instituted
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01252
Hulu filed an authorized response opposing the patent owner’s request to deny institution of an IPR covering U.S. Patent 11,463,768. The Board applied Fintiv factors and found no basis to block institution, keeping the challenge alive.
patent
NormShield Inc. (d/b/a Black Kite Inc.) v.BitSight Technologies, Inc.
· IPR2024-01394
NormShield and BitSight have jointly moved to terminate IPR2024-01394 over patent 9,438,615, citing a settlement and the early stage of the proceeding.
patent
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01252
Hulu’s parallel IPR petitions against Piranha Media’s streaming‑technology patent were instituted despite a district court finding all claims invalid under §101. The patent owner seeks Director Review, arguing the panel should have denied institution under Fintiv guidance and the Trial Practice Guide.
patent denied
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01252
The PTAB denied Hulu’s petition to institute an IPR against Piranha Media’s eSports platform patent, citing the patent’s prior invalidation in district court. The Board exercised its §314(a) discretion, concluding that proceeding would be inefficient.
patent terminated or settled
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC
· IPR2024-01337
Samsung and Headwater Research entered a settlement that led to a joint motion to terminate the IPR over patent 8,588,110. The Board granted the motion, dismissing the proceeding and treating the settlement documents as confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.ASUS Technology Licensing Inc.
· IPR2024-01246
Samsung Electronics and ASUS Technology Licensing have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,986,585 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board has not yet decided the merits, and public policy supports termination after settlement.
patent
Avanos Medical, Inc. v.Stratus Medical, LLC
· IPR2024-01210
Stratus Medical defends U.S. Patent 10,736,688 against Avanos Medical’s IPR petition, arguing that the challenges are based on vague, non‑enabling prior art and lack obviousness. The Board has already instituted the proceeding.
patent terminated or settled
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC
· IPR2024-01337
Samsung and Headwater Research have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,588,110 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board is asked to dismiss the proceeding under the statutory termination provisions.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.ASUS Technology Licensing Inc.
· IPR2024-01246
Samsung Electronics and ASUS Technology Licensing filed a joint request with the PTAB to have their settlement materials treated as business‑confidential information under 35 U.S.C. §317(b) and 37 C.F.R. §42.74(c). The request seeks to keep the settlement separate from the public file and limit access to government agencies or parties showing good cause.
patent
Avanos Medical, Inc. v.Stratus Medical, LLC
· IPR2024-01209
Stratus Medical defends its RF neurotomy patent against Avanos Medical’s IPR challenge, arguing the prior art is non‑analogous, vague, and non‑enabling, and highlighting commercial success and industry praise as evidence of non‑obviousness.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Geneoscopy, Inc. v.Exact Sciences Corporation
· IPR2024-01330
The PTAB held that all 20 claims of Exact Sciences' 11,634,781 patent are obvious over prior art, rendering them unpatentable. Geneoscopy successfully proved the combination of existing fecal screening methods made the claims non‑inventive.
patent
Geneoscopy, Inc. v.Exact Sciences Corporation
· IPR2024-01330
Exact Sciences seeks Director Review of a PTAB Final Written Decision that found its at‑home stool‑based colorectal cancer screening patent unpatentable. The request argues the petitioner’s inconsistent claim constructions and reliance on contradictory expert testimony violated Board policy.
patent terminated or settled
Silicon Motion Inc. et al. v.K. Mizra LLC
· IPR2024-01241
Silicon Motion and patent holder K.Mizra have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,111,608 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review.
patent terminated or settled
Silicon Motion Inc. et al. v.K. Mizra LLC
· IPR2024-01240
Silicon Motion and K. Mizra settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,160,466. The Board terminated the proceeding without a merits decision, treating the settlement agreement as confidential.
patent
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
· IPR2024-01239
Arista Networks and Orckit Corporation filed a joint request to keep their settlement agreement confidential and to terminate the pending IPR over patent 10,652,111.
patent terminated or settled
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01324
The PTAB terminated IPR2024-01324 (patent 9,098,855) after Quotient Technology and Intelligent Clearing Network reached a settlement, filing a joint motion to end the review.
patent terminated or settled
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
· IPR2024-01239
Arista Networks and Orckit Corporation filed a joint motion to terminate IPR2024-01239 after reaching a settlement that resolves all disputes over the ’111 patent. The Board has not yet decided the merits, and the parties seek termination for judicial economy.
patent terminated or settled
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
· IPR2024-01238
Arista Networks and Orckit Corporation settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 8,830,821, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before trial. The settlement agreement is treated as confidential business information.
