US PTAB IP Litigation

Juniper Networks, Inc v.Monarch Networking Solutions LLC

· IPR2024-00565

Juniper seeks to invalidate Monarch’s ’845 patent covering IPv4/IPv6 transition mechanisms, arguing the claims are obvious over Ananda, Wetterwald, and RFC4380 and requesting the PTAB to institute an IPR.

Dr. Reddy's Laboratories S.A. et al. v.Eye Therapies, LLC et al.

· IPR2024-00563

Dr. Reddy’s and Eye Therapies settled their IPR dispute, resulting in a joint motion that terminated the proceedings. The Board granted the termination and kept the settlement confidential.

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v.Greenthread, LLC

· IPR2024-00550

Greenthread has filed a Notice of Appeal to the Federal Circuit challenging the PTAB’s finding that multiple claims of U.S. Patent 10,510,842 are obvious. The appeal focuses on alleged errors in obviousness analysis and claim construction.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Staton Techiya LLC

· IPR2024-00559

Samsung, Harman and Staton Techiya have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,610,587 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding, requesting the settlement be kept confidential.

Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Monarch Networking Solutions LLC

· IPR2024-00561

Monarch’s response to Juniper’s IPR argues that the challenged claims of U.S. Patent 8,130,775 are not obvious, emphasizing that prior‑art references do not disclose a shared link between two pseudo‑wires.

Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Monarch Networking Solutions LLC

· IPR2024-00561

Monarch Networking’s sur‑reply defends the validity of its MPLS‑pseudowire patent against Juniper’s IPR petition, arguing the prior art does not disclose the claimed shared‑link architecture.

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v.Greenthread, LLC

· IPR2024-00551

Greenthread, LLC has filed a notice of appeal to the Federal Circuit challenging the PTAB’s finding that multiple claims of U.S. Patent 10,734,481 are obvious. The appeal focuses on alleged errors in claim construction, obviousness analysis, and consideration of secondary factors.

Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Monarch Networking Solutions LLC

· IPR2024-00561

Monarch’s preliminary response urges the PTAB to deny Juniper’s IPR petition, arguing the cited references do not teach a shared link between two pseudo‑wires and that the petition repeats arguments already considered by the USPTO.

DISH Network L.L.C. et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00560

DISH Network filed a Director Review request after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against Entropic Communications’ 8,631,450 patent. The petitioner claims the Board misapplied obviousness law by demanding a specific benefit, contrary to precedent, and seeks reversal.

Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.

· IPR2024-00558

Microchip Technology has filed a Director Review petition challenging the PTAB’s denial of institution in two IPRs that target Aptiv’s USB‑hub patent. The petitioner alleges the Board abused its discretion by omitting claim construction and prior‑art analysis. The request seeks reversal of the denial.

patent denied

Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.

· IPR2024-00558

The USPTO Director denied Microchip Technology's request for Director Review of the institution decisions in IPR2024-00558 involving Aptiv's patent 9,460,037. The order provides no further substantive analysis.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Staton Techiya LLC

· IPR2024-00559

Samsung Electronics, its U.S. affiliate and Harman reached a settlement with Staton Techiya over U.S. Patent 11,610,587 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a).

Nichia Corporation v.BX LED LLC

· IPR2024-00544

Nichia and LED maker BX LED have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 7,973,465 and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR. The motion cites lack of institution and no merits decided, requesting Board approval of termination.

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v.Greenthread, LLC

· IPR2024-00552

The PTAB held that all 26 challenged claims of Greenthread’s ’222 patent are unpatentable as obvious, based on prior art references Kawagoe, Onoda, and Nishizawa. Monolithic Power Systems prevailed over the patent owner’s arguments on privity and licensing.

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v.Greenthread, LLC

· IPR2024-00553

The PTAB held that Monolithic Power Systems proved all challenged claims of Greenthread’s 11,316,014 patent obvious over Kawagoe, Onoda and Nishizawa, rendering the claims unpatentable.

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v.Greenthread, LLC

· IPR2024-00550

Monolithic Power Systems successfully challenged Greenthread’s U.S. Pat. 10,510,842, proving all asserted claims obvious over prior‑art references. The Board affirmed the petition, rendering the claims unpatentable.

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v.Greenthread, LLC

· IPR2024-00551

The PTAB held that all 22 challenged claims of Greenthread’s ’481 patent are obvious over prior art and thus unpatentable. Monolithic Power Systems successfully defended its position, while Greenthread’s privity and licensing arguments were rejected.

Nichia Corporation v.BX LED LLC

· IPR2024-00544

Nichia and BX LED settled their LED patent dispute, filing a joint motion that led the PTAB to terminate the IPR before any trial. The settlement agreement was ordered to be kept confidential.

patent denied

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00513

The USPTO denied Aylo Freesites’ petitions for Director Review of the institution decisions in several IPRs, including IPR2024-00513 covering patent 10,757,156. The denial leaves the original institution decisions unchanged.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.InfoExpress Inc.

· IPR2024-00539

Cisco and Fortinet have filed a Request for Director Review challenging the PTAB’s final decision in IPR2024-00539. They argue the Board improperly allowed the patent owner to incorporate arguments by reference, violating USPTO rules and prejudicing the petitioners.

Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al. v.Sung, Chien-Min

· IPR2024-00535

Samsung submits an authorized response to the Patent Owner’s Director Review request, defending the Board’s findings that the ’802 patent’s claims are valid and that prior art references, including Sung’146, are properly considered. The petitioner seeks denial of the review.

Capital One, National Association et al. v.--

· IPR2024-00643

Hulu and Capital One settled their dispute with patent owner Implicit over U.S. Patent 8,056,075 B2. The PTAB granted a motion to terminate the IPR and ordered the settlement agreements kept confidential.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.InfoExpress Inc.

· IPR2024-00540

Cisco and Fortinet have filed a Director Review petition to overturn the PTAB’s denial of institution for their IPR against InfoExpress’s network‑security patent. They contend the Board misinterpreted claim language on user authentication and ignored supporting evidence from the Krantz reference.