US PTAB IP Litigation
5,620 annotated decisions
Page 138 of 235 · 5,620 total
patent terminated or settled · Sep 25, 2024
HIKMA PHARMACEUTICALS USA INC. v.Axsome Malta Ltd. et al.
· IPR2024-01418
Hikma Pharmaceuticals filed an IPR against Axsome Malta’s 11,560,354 patent. The parties settled the dispute early and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding. The Board granted the motion and ordered the settlement agreement to be kept confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 25, 2024
HIKMA PHARMACEUTICALS USA INC. v.Axsome Malta Ltd. et al.
· IPR2024-01418
Hikma Pharmaceuticals filed a joint motion with Axsome Malta to terminate IPR2024‑01418 after reaching a confidential settlement, resulting in dismissal of the petition before institution.
patent · Sep 25, 2024
PHISON ELECTRONICS CORPORATION v.Vervain, LLC
· PGR2024-00048
Phison Electronics has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of all seven claims of Vervain’s ‘612 NAND flash memory patent, alleging lack of written description, indefiniteness, and obviousness. The petition relies on extensive prior‑art patents and technical literature covering hybrid SLC‑MLC flash systems.
patent · Sep 25, 2024
Decent Espresso International Ltd. v.DUVALL ESPRESSO IP ENFORCEMENT, LLC
· IPR2024-01483
Decent Espresso International seeks to invalidate all twelve claims of U.S. Patent 11,576,524 covering espresso‑machine temperature control, arguing they are obvious over the Startz patent and multiple coffee‑machine references. The petition relies on expert testimony and enumerates four §103 grounds.
patent · Sep 25, 2024
HIKMA PHARMACEUTICALS USA INC. v.Axsome Malta Ltd. et al.
· IPR2024-01418
Hikma Pharmaceuticals has filed an IPR petition challenging Axsome’s U.S. Patent 11,560,354 covering solriamfetol compositions. The petition alleges obviousness of claims 1‑8 based on three prior‑art references and argues against discretionary denial of institution.
patent denied · Sep 25, 2024
PHISON ELECTRONICS CORPORATION v.Vervain, LLC
· PGR2024-00048
PHISON ELECTRONICS CORPORATION's petition challenging Vervain, LLC's NAND Flash Memory patent was denied by the PTAB. The Board found the specification sufficiently supported the claims against indefiniteness and written description challenges, and Petitioner failed to meet the likelihood standard for obviousness.
patent denied · Sep 25, 2024
Decent Espresso International Ltd. v.DUVALL ESPRESSO IP ENFORCEMENT, LLC
· IPR2024-01483
Decent Espresso International Ltd. failed its IPR challenge against Duvall Espresso's brewing system patent, as the Board found insufficient evidence that the prior art rendered the invention obvious. The institution decision denied the petition, maintaining the validity of the core claims related to infused beverage preparation.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.SiOnyx, LLC
· IPR2024-01431
Samsung and SiOnyx jointly moved to terminate IPR2024‑01431 after reaching a settlement, also requesting the settlement documents be kept confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.SiOnyx, LLC
· IPR2024-01430
Samsung and SiOnyx jointly moved to terminate the IPR over patent 11,069,737 before any trial. The Board granted the motion, dismissing the petition under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a).
patent · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01404
Samsung seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s Final Written Decision that cancelled all claims of Harbor Island Dynamic’s TSV patent. The patent owner contends the Board erred by ignoring expert evidence, failing to construe a claim term, and inventing unsupported modifications to prior art.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.SiOnyx, LLC
· IPR2024-01431
Samsung Electronics and SiOnyx reached a settlement, leading the PTAB to terminate IPR2024-01431 concerning patent 11,069,737 B2. The settlement agreement is kept confidential per statutory requirements.
patent denied · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01402
The PTAB denied Samsung’s petitions for Director Review of the institution decisions in four IPRs, including IPR2024-01402 covering patent 7,745,886, leaving the institution decisions unchanged.
patent · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01402
Samsung has filed a Director Review petition challenging the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR on Harbor Island Dynamic’s semiconductor switching‑circuit patent. The patent owner argues the Board misapplied Fintiv precedent regarding the nearby district‑court trial date.
patent · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01402
Samsung filed an Authorized Response to the PTAB Director Review request, arguing the Board correctly weighed Factor 2 and should deny the review of Harbor Island Dynamic’s location‑services patent. The brief relies on extensive case law to show that a three‑month trial‑date delta only slightly favors discretionary denial.
patent · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01404
Harbor Island Dynamic requested Director Review of IPR2024-01404 (and IPR2024-01402). Samsung has five business days to file a concise response limited to the issues raised, with no new evidence allowed.
patent · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01402
Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 19 claims of Harbor Island Dynamic’s ’886 SOI switching circuit patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness over Okashita, Yu, and Burgener. The petition argues that the Board should institute review and that denial is not warranted under Fintiv and §325(d).
patent · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.SiOnyx, LLC
· IPR2024-01430
Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 55 claims of SiOnyx’s U.S. Patent 11,069,737 covering textured‑layer image sensors. The petition relies on five prior‑art references to argue anticipation and obviousness under §§ 102 and 103 and asks the Board not to deny institution.
patent instituted · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01402
Samsung Electronics successfully petitioned the PTAB against Harbor Island Dynamic's patent, leading to an institution decision. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of anticipation for claim 1 based on Okashita prior art and determined that combining structures would render other claims obvious.
patent Final Written Decision · Sep 24, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01404
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 18 challenged claims unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated anticipation under § 102 and obviousness under § 103, primarily using prior art reference Cooney.
patent · Sep 23, 2024
Menard, Inc. v.Signify Holdings B.V. et al.
· IPR2024-01469
Menard has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of Signify’s configurable lighting patent, arguing that the CCT switch placement is obvious in view of several prior‑art patents. The petition seeks institution despite parallel district‑court litigation.
patent · Sep 23, 2024
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
· IPR2024-01450
Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Portsmouth Network’s ’088 patent on bandwidth‑sharing routing, arguing obviousness over Dziong, Sathyanath and Jensen, and opposing discretionary denial.
patent denied · Sep 23, 2024
Menard, Inc. v.Signify Holdings B.V. et al.
· IPR2024-01469
The PTAB denied a request to vacate a Final Written Decision (FWD) because the Petitioner introduced new arguments regarding obviousness in its reply brief. The Board found that the initial petition lacked sufficient particularity to support the claims' unpatentability.
patent instituted · Sep 23, 2024
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
· IPR2024-01450
Cisco Systems successfully argued that multiple claims of Portsmouth Network Corporation's patent were unpatentable over prior art references Dziong and Sathyanath, specifically regarding network routing and bandwidth allocation. The PTAB found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on several key claims, leading to the institution of the IPR.
patent Final Written Decision · Sep 23, 2024
Menard, Inc. v.Signify Holdings B.V. et al.
· IPR2024-01469
The Final Written Decision found that most claims (1-7, 9-15, and 18-20) were unpatentable under § 103 based on prior art combinations. The Board affirmed the Petitioner's success in demonstrating obviousness over references like Chaimberg and Roberge for several claim groups. While some procedural issues regarding timeliness were resolved favorably for the Petitioner, the core finding was a rejection of broad claims due to anticipation and obviousness.
