US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 122 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent terminated or settled
Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.
· IPR2024-01190
Wiz, Inc. and Orca Security settled their IPR dispute over patent 11,740,926. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate, which the Board granted, sealing the settlement agreement.
patent terminated or settled
Liberty Energy, Inc. et al. v.U.S. Well Services, LLC
· IPR2024-01274
Liberty Energy and U.S. Well Services settled their IPR dispute over Patent 11,091,992. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and kept the settlement confidential.
patent
Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.
· IPR2024-01190
Wiz, Inc. and Orca Security jointly filed a request to keep their settlement agreement confidential, invoking 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and related regulations. The Board is asked to treat the agreement as business confidential information and restrict its access.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.ASUS Technology Licensing Inc.
· IPR2024-01273
Samsung Electronics and ASUS Technology Licensing jointly filed a motion to have their settlement agreement kept confidential under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and related regulations. The request seeks to separate the settlement materials from the public PTAB file.
patent
Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al. v.Pictiva Displays International Ltd. et al.
· IPR2024-01187
Samsung Display files a response defending the PTAB’s institution of its IPR against Pictiva’s request for Director Review. The petitioner emphasizes that the Sotera stipulation and prior guidance make a discretionary denial inappropriate.
patent terminated or settled
3Shape A/S et al. v.Medit Corporation et al.
· IPR2024-01276
3Shape and Medit have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,245,374, filing a joint motion to terminate the pending IPR. The motion cites settlement, lack of a preliminary response, and no institution decision as grounds for termination.
patent terminated or settled
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01233
Dyson and Omachron have reached a settlement and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent 9,301,666. The motion cites statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a) and argues that the Board should end the proceeding before any merits are decided.
patent
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01343
TikTok has requested Director Review of two IPRs involving NTECH’s patent 9,923,947. The Board limited the Patent Owner’s response to five pages and a five‑day deadline, prohibiting new evidence.
patent terminated or settled
3Shape A/S et al. v.Medit Corporation et al.
· IPR2024-01265
3Shape and Medit have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,262,864, filing a joint motion to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board has not yet issued an institution decision, and the patent owner did not submit a preliminary response.
patent
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01271
Google has filed a petition for rehearing after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against Metarail’s ‘normalized variable data database’ patent. The petitioner contends the Board misread claim scope and that the Belanger‑Halevy combination satisfies the claimed mapping step.
patent
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01270
Google has filed a petition for rehearing after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against Metarail’s data‑mapping patent. The petitioner asserts the Board misread claim scope and the combination of Belanger and Halevy references.
patent
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01272
Google has filed a petition for rehearing after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against Metarail’s ’734 patent. The petitioner asserts the Board misread the claim scope by improperly tying it to a non‑limiting table example. Google seeks reversal so the trial can proceed.
patent denied
Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC
· IPR2024-01180
Samsung’s petition to invalidate Headwater Research’s 9,271,184 patent on obviousness grounds was denied. The Board concluded the prior art did not teach the specific blocking step required by the claims, failing the reasonable‑likelihood test.
patent terminated or settled
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Croga Innovations Ltd.
· IPR2024-01282
Cisco Systems and Croga Innovations settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,738,368. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate the proceeding, and the Board granted the termination.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company et al.
· IPR2024-01267
Samsung and Cerence have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,026,428 and jointly filed a motion to terminate the proceeding while requesting the settlement be kept confidential under statutory authority.
patent
Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC
· IPR2024-01181
Lenovo and Motorola filed a joint request to keep their settlement agreement confidential and to terminate the IPR against Headwater Research's patent 10,749,700. The motion relies on statutory confidentiality provisions.
patent
Solaris Oilfield Site Services Operating, LLC et al. v.Masaba, Inc.
· IPR2024-01179
Masaba seeks Director review of the PTAB’s Final Written Decision that upheld an obviousness finding on its aggregate transferring system patent. The patent owner contends the Board ignored critical real‑world evidence and mis‑qualified the petitioner’s expert.
patent terminated or settled
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company et al.
· IPR2024-01267
Samsung Electronics and Cerence have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent No. 9,026,428 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a) and argues that termination aligns with public policy and resource efficiency.
patent terminated or settled
3Shape A/S et al. v.Medit Corporation et al.
· IPR2024-01266
3Shape and Medit have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,262,864, filing a joint motion to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board has not yet decided on institution, and the parties seek dismissal to preserve resources.
patent denied
LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC
· IPR2024-01224
Lenovo’s request for director review of the PTAB’s decision on its IPR challenging patent 7,623,439 was denied. The Board found the petitioner introduced new arguments and evidence not previously presented and failed to show good cause for submitting additional evidence.
patent
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01176
Amazon and Nokia have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 8,175,148 and jointly filed a request to treat the settlement agreement as confidential and terminate the proceeding. The motion relies on statutory provisions for confidentiality of settlement agreements.
patent terminated or settled
AMAZON.COM, INC. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01175
Amazon and Nokia settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 6,856,701 B2. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and partially approved confidentiality for the settlement documents.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Penumbra, Inc. v.RapidPulse, Inc.
· IPR2024-01261
The PTAB held that all 21 claims of RapidPulse’s ’253 aspiration thrombectomy patent are unpatentable, finding them obvious over Teigen, Grey and other prior art. Penumbra’s petition succeeded, leading to a sweeping invalidation.
patent terminated or settled
3Shape A/S et al. v.Medit Corporation et al.
· IPR2024-01260
3Shape and Medit settled their IPR dispute over patent 7,912,257, leading the PTAB to dismiss the proceedings before any trial was instituted.
