US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 165 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent terminated or settled
Jeisys Medical Inc. et al. v.Serendia, LLC
· IPR2024-00383
Jeisys Medical and Serendia settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,775,774 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding.
patent
Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. v.Heron Therapeutics, Inc.
· PGR2025-00036
Azurity has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑30 of Heron’s U.S. 12,115,255 patent covering injectable aprepitant emulsions. The petition alleges obviousness, lack of written description, and lack of enablement. Institution of the petition is pending.
patent terminated or settled
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Advanced Coding Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00372
Samsung and Advanced Coding Technologies settled their IPR dispute over patent 10,218,995. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate the proceeding and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.
patent
Krisp Technologies, Inc. v.Sanas.AI, Inc.
· PGR2026-00032
Krisp Technologies has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking to invalidate Sanas.ai’s real‑time accent‑correction patent. The petition alleges obviousness over multiple prior‑art references covering speech‑processing modules. All 18 claims are challenged.
patent
Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. v.Heron Therapeutics, Inc.
· PGR2025-00035
Azurity has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑30 of Heron’s U.S. 12,115,254 patent covering injectable aprepitant emulsions. The petition alleges obviousness over four prior‑art references and asserts lack of written description and enablement due to overly broad claim ranges. Institution is requested and discretionary denial is contested.
patent
Par Health, Inc. v.InfoRLife, S.A.
· PGR2026-00036
Par Health petitions the PTAB to institute a post‑grant review of U.S. Patent 12,370,153 covering ready‑to‑use ketamine infusion formulations. The petition asserts anticipation by a Biomed data sheet and obviousness over Biomed combined with standard pharmaceutical references and commercial infusion bag literature.
patent terminated or settled
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Advanced Coding Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00372
Samsung and video‑codec startup Advanced Coding Technologies have settled their dispute over a moving‑picture encoding patent, filing a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review.
patent
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2024-00370
Micron filed a petition for rehearing after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against Netlist’s ’608 patent. The petitioner asserts the Board missed critical explanations of how the Osanai reference satisfies the claimed data‑path and delay‑circuit limitations.
patent
Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.
· IPR2024-00496
Microchip Technology filed a Director Review request after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against Aptiv’s U.S. Patent 10,545,899, alleging the Board failed to analyze prior art and apply agreed claim construction.
patent
Altria Client Services LLC v.--
· PGR2026-00035
Altria Client Services LLC petitions the PTAB to cancel a design patent for a dog‑toy set that mimics Marlboro cigarette packaging, citing a 1959 Life Magazine ad and a 1976 trademark registration as prior art.
patent
Krisp Technologies, Inc. v.Sanas.AI, Inc.
· PGR2026-00033
Krisp Technologies petitions the PTAB to invalidate Sanas.AI’s 12,417,756 patent covering real‑time accent mimicking, asserting that all 20 claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art speech‑processing references.
patent denied
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2024-00370
The PTAB denied Micron's request for rehearing of its petition to institute an IPR against Netlist's memory‑controller patent, finding that Micron introduced arguments not present in the original petition.
patent denied
Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.
· IPR2024-00495
Microchip files a brief urging the PTAB Director to deny Aptiv’s request for review of the Board’s obviousness ruling on claims 13‑14 of U.S. Patent 9,619,420, a USB switching invention.
patent terminated or settled
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC
· IPR2024-00511
Motorola Solutions and STA Group have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,319,852 and jointly moved to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317(a).
patent terminated or settled
TCL INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS CO., LTD. v.ATI Technologies ULC
· IPR2024-00366
The IPR concerning patent 8,760,454 was terminated after the parties reached a settlement. Realtek and ATI filed a joint motion to end the proceeding, and the Board granted the termination under 35 U.S.C. §317.
patent
MPL Brands NV, Inc. v.BuzzBallz, LLC
· PGR2024-00035
MPL Brands has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of BuzzBallz’s ’441 beverage‑container patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art cans and a lack of written description.
patent
Toyota Motor Corp. v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC
· PGR2025-00041
Toyota Motor Corp. has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of AutoConnect Holdings’ U.S. Patent No. 12,039,243 covering vehicle user‑profile systems. The petitioner alleges the claims are abstract and obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
patent
GD Energy Products, LLC v.Kerr Machine Company
· PGR2025-00031
GD Energy Products has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑15 of Kerr Machine Co.'s 12,152,582 pump patent, arguing obviousness over several prior‑art pump designs and indefiniteness of claim 15.
patent
Ascend Elements, Inc. v.Duesenfeld GmbH
· PGR2025-00037
Ascend Elements has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of Duesenfeld’s battery‑recycling patent. The petition alleges obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and indefiniteness of key claim language.
patent
AdvanCell Pty Ltd. v.Sciencons AS et al.
· PGR2025-00040
AdvanCell has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of all 38 claims of U.S. Patent 12,249,437, arguing anticipation, obviousness, and indefiniteness based on prior art from Hassfjell‑Hoff, Norman, IAEA, and Westrøm.
patent
Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. v.Biofrontera Inc.
· PGR2026-00021
Sun Pharmaceutical has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of all 17 claims of Biofrontera’s nanoemulsion patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness over the Uhlmann and Palazzolo prior‑art references.
patent
Wella Operations US LLC v.Olaplex, Inc.
· PGR2026-00010
Wella Operations seeks a post‑grant review of Olaplex’s ’225 patent, arguing the claims are too broad, lack enablement, written description, and are indefinite.
patent
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2024-00370
Micron has filed a petition for Director Review seeking reversal of the PTAB’s discretionary denial to join Samsung’s IPR against Netlist’s memory‑module patent. The request centers on the inapplicability of General Plastic factors to me‑too joinder petitions.
patent terminated or settled
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. v.Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00356
Cadence Design Systems and Semiconductor Design Technologies settled their IPR dispute over patent 7,603,636, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding without a final written decision.
