US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 127 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Dr. Squatch, LLC v.The Procter & Gamble Company
· IPR2024-01173
Procter & Gamble has filed a Request for Director Review seeking reversal of a PTAB decision that found its natural deodorant patent obvious. The company challenges the Board’s claim construction, motivation to combine prior art, and the petitioner’s failure to disclose real parties in interest.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.ST CasesTech, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-01032
Samsung successfully challenged Staton Techiya’s echo‑cancelling ear‑piece patent. The PTAB found all asserted claims unpatentable as obvious over a combination of prior‑art references.
patent terminated or settled
Senko Advanced Components v.US Conec Ltd.
· IPR2024-01074
Senko Advanced Components and US Conec have settled their IPR dispute over patent 11,880,075. The parties jointly requested the settlement be kept confidential and moved to withdraw the petition, ending the proceeding.
patent
Senko Advanced Components v.US Conec Ltd.
· IPR2024-01074
Senko Advanced Components and US Conec Ltd. have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,880,075 and jointly moved to withdraw the inter partes review, seeking full termination of the proceeding.
patent instituted
NXP USA, INC. et al. v.ParkerVision, Inc.
· IPR2024-01068
The PTAB instituted an IPR against ParkerVision’s ’528 mixed‑signal chip patent, covering 30 claims, and granted NXP’s motion to join the parallel TI IPR.
patent
Arashi Vision Inc. (d/b/a Insta360) v.GoPro, Inc.
· IPR2024-01052
Arashi Vision (Insta360) submits a response urging the Director to deny GoPro’s request for review of the PTAB’s decision. The petitioner contends the Board correctly applied obviousness analysis to the Thomason and Voss references and that GoPro’s new arguments are forfeited or lack a nexus. No procedural error is identified, and the Director should reject the review.
patent
Arashi Vision Inc. (d/b/a Insta360) v.GoPro, Inc.
· IPR2024-01052
GoPro has filed a Request for Director Review seeking reversal of the PTAB’s finding that Insta360’s claims 7‑8 and 17‑18 are unpatentable. The petition argues the Board misapplied obviousness analysis, ignored unpredictable‑effect evidence, and misinterpreted claim language.
patent
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01162
Dyson and Omachron have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,903,546 and jointly request the Board to terminate the proceeding and keep the settlement agreement confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01140
Amazon and Nokia settled their IPR disputes over four wireless patents, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceedings and keep the settlement documents confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC
· IPR2024-01051
Samsung and Headwater Research settled their dispute, leading the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review of patent 8,639,811. The settlement agreement was ordered to be kept confidential.
patent instituted
Imperative Care, Inc. v.INARI MEDICAL, INC.
· IPR2024-01157
Imperative Care has successfully instituted an IPR against Inari Medical’s 11,844,921 B2 hemostasis valve patent, asserting unpatentability under §§102 and 103 based on Schaffer, Hartley, and Eller. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success and ordered review of all challenged claims.
patent denied
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Optronic Sciences LLC
· IPR2024-01131
The PTAB denied Optronic Sciences’ request to revisit the institution of its IPR against BOE Technology Group, finding no extraordinary circumstances and that the new Director’s guidance did not apply.
patent
National Beef Packing Company, LLC v.Institute for Environmental Health, Inc.
· IPR2024-01156
National Beef and Institute for Environmental Health have settled their disputes over four patents and filed a joint motion to terminate the related IPRs. The motion relies on statutory authority and Board precedent favoring termination after settlement.
patent
Apple Inc. v.S.M.R Innovations LTD et al.
· IPR2024-01048
Apple has filed a request for rehearing, arguing that the PTAB abused its discretion in instituting an IPR on patent 10,547,648. The owners claim the Board relied on unmapped prior art and misread claim language.
patent terminated or settled
Sony Corporation v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC
· IPR2024-01046
Sony and Optimum Imaging Technologies reached a settlement that resolved all disputes over U.S. Patent 10,877,266. The parties jointly moved to terminate the IPR, and the Board granted the termination and ordered the settlement agreement to be kept confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Curtis Industries, LLC et al. v.B & D TECHNOLOGIES LLC
· IPR2024-01150
Curtis Industries and B&D Technologies settled their inter partes review of U.S. Patent 10,632,815 before the Board instituted a trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Pascal Technologies v.Cambridge Enterprise Limited et al.
· IPR2024-01235
Pascal Technologies and Cambridge Enterprise Limited, along with two universities, settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,230,656. The Board terminated the proceeding and treated the settlement agreement as confidential business information.
patent terminated or settled
Reolink Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.--
· IPR2024-01154
Reolink Digital Technology withdrew its petition to challenge KT Imaging's U.S. Patent No. 8,314,481, ending the inter partes review before any substantive proceedings began.
patent terminated or settled
Reolink Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.--
· IPR2024-01155
Reolink Digital Technology filed a motion to withdraw its petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent 8,004,602. The patent owner, KT Imaging, did not oppose, and the Board was asked to terminate the proceeding at its early stage.
patent denied
BOE Technology Group Co., LTD v.Optronic Sciences LLC
· IPR2024-01134
The PTAB denied Optronic Sciences’ request to revisit the institution of six inter partes reviews filed by BOE Technology Group. The Board found no extraordinary circumstances and held that the deadline for additional briefing had passed.
patent terminated or settled
NPX USA, Inc. et al. v.Bell Northern Research, LLC
· IPR2024-01044
NXP USA and Bell Northern Research entered a settlement and jointly moved to terminate IPR2024-01044 covering patent RE48,629. The Board granted the termination and ordered the settlement documents to be kept confidential.
patent terminated or settled
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01043
Amazon and Nokia have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 8,918,741 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding, requesting the settlement documents be kept confidential.
patent
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01151
Dyson and Omachron have reached a settlement over U.S. Patent 11,910,984 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites statutory authority and public‑policy benefits of settlement.
patent terminated or settled
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-01141
Amazon and Nokia filed a joint request to treat their settlement documents as confidential and to terminate the IPR over patent 8,036,273.
