US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 119 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Google LLC v.DH International Ltd.
· IPR2024-01322
The patent owner DH International Ltd. has requested Director Review in IPR2024-01322 concerning Google LLC's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,022,294. The Board has limited the petitioner's response to a 15‑page brief addressing only the issues raised, with no new evidence permitted.
patent
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01324
Quotient Technology and Inmar Brand Solutions jointly request that their settlement agreement be treated as confidential business information, invoking 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and related regulations.
patent terminated or settled
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01324
Quotient Technology and Inmar Brand Solutions have entered a settlement agreement and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR on patent 9,098,855.
patent
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
· IPR2024-01238
Arista Networks petitions the PTAB Director to overturn a denial that blocked its IPR on three MPLS‑related claims of Orckit’s ’821 patent. The petition alleges the Board’s claim construction was unsupported and that the prior‑art combination teaches the challenged limitation.
patent terminated or settled
Garmin International, Inc. et al. v.Saris Equipment, LLC
· IPR2024-01294
Garmin and Saris Equipment jointly moved to end the IPR over patent 10,434,394 after reaching a settlement. The Board granted the motion, terminating the proceeding and sealing the settlement agreement.
patent
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01323
Quotient Technology and Inmar Brand Solutions filed a joint request to keep their settlement agreement confidential under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and related regulations, asking the PTAB to restrict public access.
patent
Pascal Technologies v.Cambridge Enterprise Limited et al.
· IPR2024-01235
Pascal Technologies opposes the patent owner's request for director review, arguing the deposition dispute is moot and that the cited references are printed publications supporting the institution of inter partes review.
patent
Google LLC v.DH International Ltd.
· IPR2024-01322
DH International Ltd. seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against its Bluetooth‑related patent, arguing the Board used an improper subjective standard and that the cited prior art does not teach the required activation cue.
patent
Google LLC v.DH International Ltd.
· IPR2024-01322
Google filed an authorized response defending the Board’s decision to institute an IPR against DH International’s patent, rejecting claims of abuse of discretion and improper pre‑institution briefing.
patent terminated or settled
Pascal Technologies v.Cambridge Enterprise Limited et al.
· IPR2024-01235
Pascal Technologies and Cambridge Enterprise Limited jointly moved to terminate IPR2024-01235 after reaching a settlement agreement. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. § 317.
patent terminated or settled
FUJIFILM Corporation et al. v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC
· IPR2024-01374
Optimum Imaging Technologies and Panasonic have reached a settlement‑in‑principle in a Texas district court case, planning to dismiss the lawsuit after a 45‑day stay. The agreement ends the dispute over U.S. Patent 10,877,266.
patent terminated or settled
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01317
Dyson and Omachron settled their inter partes review dispute over U.S. Patent 11,910,983 B2. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.
patent
Thermaltake Technology Co., Ltd. et al. v.Chen, Chien-Hao et al.
· IPR2024-01230
Thermaltake files a response urging the PTAB to deny Lian Li’s request for Director Review of the institution decision in a lighting‑technology patent. The brief stresses procedural impropriety and the lack of any new legal or factual issues.
patent
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01317
Dyson and Omachron have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,910,983. They jointly filed a motion to terminate the proceeding and to keep the settlement agreement confidential under statutory provisions.
patent
Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. et al. v.RavenWhite Security, Inc.
· IPR2024-01316
RavenWhite Security has filed a Request for Director Review to block an IPR on its web‑cookie patent, arguing the PTAB panel misapplied the Fintiv discretionary‑denial factors and that the petitioner’s obviousness arguments are weak. The request seeks a denial of institution for claims 1‑10.
patent
Pascal Technologies v.Cambridge Enterprise Limited et al.
· IPR2024-01235
Pascal Technologies seeks Director Review of a PTAB institution, arguing the Board erred on the printed‑publication requirement and relied on inadmissible hearsay. The Patent Owner contends the petitioner failed to provide evidence that cited references qualify as printed publications and refused to make a key expert available for deposition.
patent
3Shape A/S et al. v.Medit Corporation et al.
· IPR2024-01266
3Shape and Medit have entered a settlement, and 3Shape filed a joint request to keep the agreement confidential under patent law provisions. The motion seeks to limit disclosure to federal agencies or parties with good cause.
patent terminated or settled
Hugging Face, Inc. v.FriendliAI Inc.
· IPR2024-01234
Hugging Face and FriendliAI settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,442,775 B1, leading the PTAB to terminate the IPR before institution. The settlement documents were ordered to be kept confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. et al. v.RavenWhite Security, Inc.
· IPR2024-01316
Home Depot and RavenWhite Security have reached a confidential settlement and jointly moved to terminate the IPR on patent 10,594,823. The Board is asked to authorize termination of the proceeding.
patent terminated or settled
BOE Technology Group Co., LTD v.Optronic Sciences, LLC
· IPR2024-01315
Samsung Display and BOE have filed a joint motion to terminate the IPR concerning OLED display modules, citing a confidential settlement that resolves all issues. The Board is asked to dismiss the case under statutory provisions for settlement.
patent
Thermaltake Technology Co., Ltd. et al. v.Chen, Chien-Hao et al.
· IPR2024-01230
Thermaltake seeks Director Review to overturn a PTAB decision that found its LED fan patent unpatentable. The request centers on inconsistent claim‑construction positions between the IPR and parallel district‑court litigation.
patent
Motorola Solutions, Inc. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
· IPR2024-01284
PTAB Director Review requests have been filed for four IPRs involving Motorola Solutions and Stellar’s patent. The petitioner may submit a five‑page response without new evidence, after which the Director will decide on the review.
patent
Motorola Solutions, Inc. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
· IPR2024-01314
Stellar, LLC petitions the PTAB Director to overturn institution decisions for Motorola Solutions' patents, alleging the Board misapplied Fintiv factors and abused discretion under § 314(a). The request focuses on claims 1‑20 of U.S. Patent 10,965,910.
patent
Motorola Solutions, Inc. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
· IPR2024-01313
Stellar, LLC has filed a Request for Director Review challenging the PTAB’s institution of IPR2024-01313, arguing the Board misapplied Fintiv factors and gave undue weight to Motorola’s stipulation. The petition seeks a discretionary denial under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
