US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 15 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Nov 19, 2025
Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation et al. v.Railware, Inc. et al.
· IPR2026-00135
Wabtec has filed an IPR petition challenging Railware’s RE 49,115 patent. The petition asserts that claims 20‑36 are obvious over the FRA‑Report combined with secret‑code references. No discretionary denial is alleged.
patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld · Nov 18, 2025
Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al. v.Pictiva Displays International Limited et al.
· IPR2026-00129
In IPR2024‑01094, the PTAB held claims 1,2,6,8‑14 of Pictiva’s OLED patent unpatentable over the Ma reference, while claims 3‑4 were upheld. The decision hinged on obviousness of joint vaporization and metal‑complex coordination.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 18, 2025
Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al. v.Pictiva Displays International Limited et al.
· IPR2026-00129
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all of Samsung's challenged OLED claims unpatentable. The Board held that the claims were obvious over multiple prior‑art OLED references. The decision affirms the institution of the IPR.
patent · Nov 18, 2025
Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al. v.Pictiva Displays International Limited et al.
· IPR2026-00129
Samsung Display has filed an IPR petition to invalidate all 16 claims of Pictiva's OLED patent, arguing that each claim is anticipated or obvious over prior art such as Suzuki, Diekmann, Ma, and Lee.
patent terminated or settled · Nov 14, 2025
NRG Energy, Inc. et al. v.Malikie Innovations Ltd.
· IPR2026-00120
Vivint Smart Home and NRG Energy, together with Malikie Innovations, filed a joint motion to terminate an IPR after reaching a settlement that resolves their dispute over a smart‑home energy patent.
patent terminated or settled · Nov 14, 2025
NRG Energy, Inc. et al. v.Malikie Innovations Ltd.
· IPR2026-00120
The IPR concerning Patent 11,119,756 was terminated after Vivint Smart Home, NRG Energy and Malikie Innovations reached a confidential settlement before the trial was instituted.
patent · Nov 14, 2025
Samsara Inc. v.Motive Technologies, Inc.
· IPR2026-00108
Samsara has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of Motive’s driver‑monitoring patent (US 12,062,243), asserting that the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art CNN references.
patent · Nov 14, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.
· IPR2026-00130
TSMC has filed a petition to invalidate Marlin Semiconductor’s 9,318,609 FinFET patent, asserting that all ten claims are anticipated or obvious over earlier TSMC patents and related publications. The petition lists multiple grounds under §§102 and 103, relying on Xu, Ching, and Huang references.
patent · Nov 14, 2025
NRG Energy, Inc. et al. v.Malikie Innovations Ltd.
· IPR2026-00120
Vivint Smart Home and NRG Energy have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all twenty claims of Malikie Innovations’ ’756 patent covering IoT software‑update control, citing obviousness over the Storto and Won publications.
patent instituted · Nov 14, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.
· IPR2026-00130
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted institution for multiple IPRs involving Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited against Marlin Semiconductor Ltd., allowing the merits phase to proceed.
patent denied · Nov 14, 2025
Samsara Inc. v.Motive Technologies, Inc.
· IPR2026-00108
The USPTO Board issued a Notice of Decisions on Institution for several IPRs, denying institution in some cases because the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google succeeded in an IPR against Secure Communication Technologies’ ’913 patent, with the Board finding all challenged claims unpatentable as obvious over prior art.
patent · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate Secure Communication Technologies' proximity‑beacon patent, asserting that earlier patents by Mgrdechian and others anticipate or render the claims obvious. The petition seeks institution of an IPR on claims 1‑8.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google’s IPR against Target’s proximity‑based transaction patent resulted in the Board finding all nine challenged claims unpatentable, based on anticipation and obviousness over prior‑art wireless messaging systems.
patent · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google has filed an IPR petition challenging Secure Communication Technologies' U.S. Patent 11,995,685, asserting that the claims are anticipated by Mgrdechian and obvious in view of Kulakowski. The petition argues against discretionary denial and seeks institution of the trial.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google’s IPR against Secure Communication Technologies’ proximity‑based e‑commerce patent resulted in a final written decision finding all challenged claims unpatentable for obviousness over Perttila, Emmons, and Insolia.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
The PTAB held that all challenged claims of the ’359 patent are unpatentable, finding anticipation or obviousness over Perttila and, for certain claims, over the Perttila‑Swartz combination. The decision resolves the IPR filed by Google against Secure Communication Technologies.
patent · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google has filed an IPR petition against Secure Communication Technologies' e‑commerce server patent, challenging 19 claims as obvious over Perttila, Emmons, and Insolia. The petition argues a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability and urges the Board not to deny institution under discretionary standards.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google successfully challenged Secure Communication Technologies’ ’129 patent in IPR2020‑00903. The Board found all fifteen challenged claims unpatentable under §§102 and 103, based on the Eagle prior art.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google succeeded in an IPR against Secure Communication Technologies' 7,936,736 B2 patent, leading the PTAB to find all challenged claims unpatentable on anticipation and obviousness grounds.
patent terminated or settled · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Samsung and Secure Communication Technologies settled their IPR disputes, leading the Board to terminate the proceedings before any trial was instituted.
patent · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google petitions the PTAB to invalidate Secure Communication Technologies' ’913 patent, asserting that prior art Mgrdechian and related references anticipate or render obvious all challenged claims covering wireless device identifier exchange.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google successfully challenged Secure Communication Technologies' proximity‑beacon patent, leading the PTAB to deem all eight claims unpatentable.
patent denied · Nov 11, 2025
Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00098
Google’s IPR petition challenging a proximity‑based wireless communication patent was denied, leaving the patent intact. The Board found the prior‑art arguments insufficiently particularized.
