US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 166 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00033
Merck has filed a post‑grant review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,049,652 covering engineered PH20 hyaluronidase proteins. The petition asserts lack of written description, lack of enablement, and obviousness of key mutants. The Board has not yet ruled on the petition.
patent terminated or settled
TCL INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS CO., LTD. v.ATI Technologies ULC
· IPR2024-00366
TCL Industries and ATI Technologies filed a joint motion to terminate IPR 2024-00366 concerning U.S. Patent 8,760,454. The motion indicates a settlement and seeks to end the proceeding.
patent instituted
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
· IPR2024-00370
The PTAB instituted an inter‑partes review of Netlist’s ’608 memory‑module patent on claims 1‑5 after Samsung’s petition showed a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability under obviousness.
patent terminated or settled
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. v.Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00356
Cadence and Semiconductor Design Technologies have settled their dispute and jointly moved to terminate the IPR covering U.S. Patent 7,603,636, an electronic design automation patent.
patent
Delta Power Equipment Corporation et al. v.P & F Brother Industrial Corporation
· IPR2024-00347
Delta Power Equipment, Lowe’s and Home Depot seek rehearing after the PTAB denied institution of an IPR on their cutting‑machine blade‑guard patent, arguing the Board misread the Gass prior art and that claims 1,2,5,9 are obvious.
patent
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. v.UMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
· IPR2024-00344
Cisco seeks Director Review of a PTAB decision that found Umbra's data‑beacon networking claims obvious. Umbra contends the Board misinterpreted the claim preamble and ignored key evidence, urging reversal of the unpatentability finding.
patent
OneSource Solutions International, Inc. et al. v.Hippocratic AI, Inc.
· PGR2025-00075
OSSI has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Hippocratic AI’s 12,142,371 patent, alleging obviousness, lack of enablement, indefiniteness, and abstract‑idea ineligibility.
patent
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. v.UMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
· IPR2024-00344
Cisco responded to Umbra’s request for Director Review, arguing that the Board’s claim‑construction finding that the preamble “for providing data beacons” is non‑limiting is correct and that the request should be denied.
patent
Therabody, Inc. v.DataFeel, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00026
Therabody has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of DataFeel’s 12,036,174 patent covering percussive massage devices. The petition alleges obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and a lack of written description and enablement. It also argues the Board should not invoke the Fintiv discretionary denial provision.
patent
Be Smarter, LLC et al. v.Yondr, Inc.
· PGR2025-00070
Be Smarter has filed a post‑grant review petition challenging Yondr’s ’078 patent covering locking cases for mobile devices, asserting anticipation, obviousness, indefiniteness, and lack of patent‑eligible subject matter.
patent
Charles River Laboratories, Inc. v.Seikagaku Corporation
· PGR2025-00023
Charles River Laboratories has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑10 of Seikagaku’s 11,959,109 patent covering recombinant endotoxin assay methods. The petition alleges lack of written description, lack of enablement, and anticipation by a 2019 publication.
patent
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. v.UMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
· IPR2024-00344
Cisco Systems challenged UMBRA Technologies’ ’632 patent on data‑beacon and SD‑WAN innovations. UMBRA’s response argues the cited ’421 patent and ’685 provisional lack the required disclosures and contain cancelled matter, rendering them non‑prior art. The patent owner also asserts the term “data beacon” is a limiting preamble limitation not taught by the prior art.
patent denied
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC
· IPR2024-00341
Samsung and Google successfully oppose Headwater Research’s untimely Director Review request, leaving the PTAB’s finding that the ’733 patent’s claims are unpatentable intact.
patent
RingConn, LLC v.Ouraring Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00018
RingConn has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of all 18 claims of Oura’s wearable ring patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and §112 defects. The petition also argues the Board should not deny institution under §325(d) or §314(a).
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00017
Merck has filed a PGR petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,110,520 covering engineered PH20 hyaluronidase proteins. The petition asserts lack of written description, lack of enablement, and obviousness over prior art. The Board has not yet ruled.
patent
Phison Electronics Corporation v.Vervain, LLC
· PGR2025-00011
Phison Electronics Corp. petitions the PTAB to invalidate Vervain’s ‘370 hybrid NAND‑flash patent, asserting lack of written description, indefiniteness, and obviousness over prior art. The petition targets claims 1‑18 and seeks cancellation under §§ 112(a), 112(b), 103 and 101. Institution of the review is pending.
patent
Phison Electronics Corporation v.Vervain, LLC
· PGR2025-00010
Phison Electronics Corp. has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of ten claims of Vervain’s ‘369 NAND‑flash patent, alleging abstractness, lack of written description, indefiniteness, and obviousness over prior art.
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00006
Merck has filed a PGR petition challenging Halozyme’s 13 claims covering PH20 hyaluronidase variants, asserting lack of written description, enablement, and obviousness. The petition seeks to have the claims declared unpatentable.
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00004
Merck challenges Halozyme’s broad PH20 hyaluronidase patent, asserting lack of written description, enablement, and obviousness of the claimed protein variants.
patent
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
Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.
· IPR2024-00495
The PTAB Director has acknowledged a Director Review request in IPR2024-00495 and limited the petitioner’s response to a 15‑page brief filed within five business days, prohibiting new evidence or additional briefing.
patent
Catalyst OrthoScience Inc. v.Shoulder Innovations, Inc.
· PGR2025-00001
Catalyst OrthoScience has petitioned the PTAB to institute a post‑grant review of Shoulder Innovations' reverse shoulder implant patent, asserting obviousness over six prior‑art references and indefiniteness of key claim terms.
patent
Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. et al. v.Columbia Insurance Company et al.
· PGR2024-00050
Simpson Strong‑Tie has filed a petition to have the PTAB institute review of U.S. Patent 11,920,339, asserting lack of written description, indefiniteness, and obviousness over a suite of prior‑art hangers. The petition seeks institution of post‑grant review for all 31 claims.
patent
Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.
· IPR2024-00495
Aptiv Technologies seeks Director review of the PTAB’s decision that claims 13 and 14 of its automotive connectivity patent are unpatentable. The owner contends the Board misapplied the particularity requirement, shifted the burden of proof, and ignored secondary‑considerations evidence. The request targets the Board’s Final Written Decision.
