US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 162 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Jan 7, 2025
Syngenta Crop Protection AG v.Inflexion Point Technologies, LLC
· PGR2025-00045
Syngenta has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition seeking to invalidate 19 claims of U.S. Patent 12,102,027 covering a prescriptive seed‑treatment method, alleging anticipation, obviousness, and lack of enablement.
patent · Jan 7, 2025
SCIENTIFIC DRILLING INTERNATIONAL, INC. v.Gunnar LLLP
· PGR2025-00061
Scientific Drilling International has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition seeking to invalidate all 22 claims of Gunnar LLLP’s ‘780 patent on magnetic ranging while drilling. The petition alleges lack of written description, indefiniteness, and obviousness over several prior‑art patents.
patent · Jan 7, 2025
Amazon.com Services LLC v.VB Assets, LLC
· IPR2025-01240
Amazon has filed an IPR petition challenging VB Assets’ U.S. Patent 11,080,758, asserting that all 44 claims are obvious over existing voice‑commerce technologies. The petition relies on six §103 grounds, pairing each claim set with prior‑art references such as Aretoulaki, Ramer, Kennewick, Hao and Jong.
patent denied · Jan 7, 2025
SCIENTIFIC DRILLING INTERNATIONAL, INC. v.Gunnar LLLP
· PGR2025-00061
The PTAB denied institution of a Post-Grant Review (PGR) for patent 12110780. The petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that the claims were unpatentable.
patent denied · Jan 7, 2025
Syngenta Crop Protection AG v.Inflexion Point Technologies, LLC
· PGR2025-00045
Syngenta Crop Protection AG's petition to invalidate Inflexion Point Technologies' patent was denied by the PTAB. The Board found insufficient evidence of anticipation or obviousness across multiple grounds, rejecting all challenges including enablement.
patent denied · Jan 7, 2025
Amazon.com Services LLC v.VB Assets, LLC
· IPR2025-01240
The USPTO Director denied the institution of IPR proceedings brought by Amazon against VB Assets regarding patent 11080758.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Hermes IP Management LLC
· IPR2025-00953
Samsung Electronics and Hermes IP Management have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,613,060 and jointly filed a motion to have the settlement agreement treated as business‑confidential information, effectively terminating the proceeding.
patent · Jan 5, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
· IPR2025-00934
Samsung challenges a Director Review request by Wilus over its Wi‑Fi 6 patent. The response argues that discretionary denial factors favor referral and that the cited grounds do not merit review, keeping the IPR instituted.
patent · Jan 5, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
· IPR2025-00934
Samsung seeks to uphold an IPR institution on Wilus’s Wi‑Fi packet‑format patent, while Wilus requests Director Review to overturn the institution, arguing errors on public accessibility, discretionary denial, and claim‑construction inconsistency.
patent denied · Jan 5, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
· IPR2025-00934
The USPTO denied Samsung's request for Director Review of the institution decisions in several IPRs involving Wilus's patent 11,159,210. The institution decisions remain in effect.
patent denied · Jan 5, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
· IPR2025-00934
Wilus sought leave to address recent director‑review decisions and submit new evidence in five IPRs, but the Director denied the request, citing policy against inconsistent claim constructions and statutory timing constraints.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00905
Apple and Apex Beam reached a confidential settlement and jointly moved to terminate the IPR over patent 11,917,581 covering UE and base‑station paging technology.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00898
Apple and Apex Beam Technologies entered a settlement that led to the joint termination of sixteen inter partes review proceedings, including IPR2025-00898 covering patent 10,951,271. The Board granted the motion to terminate under 35 U.S.C. § 317.
patent instituted · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00894
Apple’s IPR petition was granted, instituting review of all 20 claims of Apex Beam’s 5G paging patent. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on prior art You, Liu, and Mallick.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00894
Apple and Apex Beam Technologies jointly moved to terminate sixteen inter‑partes review proceedings after reaching a settlement. The PTAB granted the motion, treating the settlement agreements as confidential.
patent · Jan 5, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Hermes IP Management LLC
· IPR2025-00953
Samsung Electronics and Hermes IP Management have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,613,060 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The motion relies on 35 U.S.C. § 317(a) and cites public‑policy reasons for settlement.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Hermes IP Management LLC
· IPR2025-00953
Samsung and Hermes IP Management settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,613,060 before the Board instituted a trial. The Board granted the parties' motions to terminate and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00898
Apple and Apex Beam have reached a confidential settlement and jointly moved to terminate the IPR concerning Apex Beam’s multi‑antenna transmission patent (U.S. 10,951,271). The motion cites compliance with 35 U.S.C. §317 and argues that termination serves public policy.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00905
Apple and Apex Beam Technologies settled their disputes, leading to the joint termination of sixteen IPRs covering laser‑beam‑steering patents. The Board granted the motion, citing good cause and public‑policy benefits of settlement.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Google LLC v.Sandpiper CDN, LLC
· IPR2025-00860
Kaifi LLC and Amazon reached a settlement, filing a joint motion to stay court deadlines while they finalize the agreement.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00894
Apple and Apex Beam have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,462,767 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 5, 2025
Docker Inc. v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC
· IPR2025-00840
Docker Inc. and Intellectual Ventures II LLC settled their inter partes review disputes before trial, leading the PTAB to dismiss the IPRs. The settlement covered three patents and the agreements were treated as confidential business information.
patent · Jan 5, 2025
AZURITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v.Helsinn Healthcare S.A.
· IPR2025-00945
Azurity has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 25 claims of Helsinn’s antiemetic patent (US 8,623,826) on the ground that the claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references and that the asserted synergy is not unexpected.
patent · Jan 5, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-00922
Apple Inc. petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑20 of Apex Beam’s multi‑antenna transmission patent, asserting obviousness over Liu and Park publications. The petition details a predictable combination of prior‑art teachings and argues against discretionary denial.
