US PTAB IP Litigation
5,620 annotated decisions
Page 168 of 235 · 5,620 total
patent instituted · Jul 11, 2024
Jumio Corporation v.FaceTec, Inc.
· IPR2025-00108
Jumio Corporation successfully secured institution at the PTAB against FaceTec, Inc., establishing a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for 24 claims related to facial recognition. The Board found that combinations of prior art references (Derakhshani/Tanii and Zhang/Tanii) rendered the claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
patent instituted · Jul 11, 2024
Jumio Corporation v.FaceTec, Inc.
· IPR2025-00106
Jumio Corporation successfully petitioned to institute an IPR against FaceTec, Inc., regarding facial recognition technology patents. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success on multiple grounds, despite patent owner arguments concerning prior art and related litigation.
patent instituted · Jul 11, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.KP INNOVATIONS 2, LLC
· IPR2025-00101
Samsung Electronics' IPR challenge against KP Innovations was denied institution by the PTAB, despite arguments of anticipation and obviousness. The Board cited concerns over inefficient use of time and resources to decline institution, though a dissent argued for prevailing likelihood.
patent · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
Google and co‑petitioners seek rehearing of the Director’s order that denied institution of an IPR against Mullen’s 2021 wireless‑technology patent. They argue the Director misapplied discretionary denial standards, ignored the Sotera stipulation, and retroactively applied policy changes. The petition asks the Board to reinstate the original institution decision.
patent · Jul 10, 2024
MediaTek Inc. v.DAEDALUS PRIME LLC
· IPR2024-01488
MediaTek and Daedalus Prime have settled their IPR dispute and filed a joint motion to have the settlement agreement treated as business confidential information under 35 USC 317(b). The Board is asked to keep the agreement separate from the patent file and limit access.
patent instituted · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00019
Google and co‑petitioners filed an authorized response urging the PTAB to uphold the institution of IPR2025‑00019 against Mullen Industries’ patent 9,204,283. The brief emphasizes minimal claim overlap, strong petition merits, and the inapplicability of discretionary denial under § 314(a).
patent · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00019
Mullen Industries seeks Director Review to overturn the PTAB’s decision instituting an IPR against its wireless‑device‑location patent. The request argues the Board misapplied Fintiv factors and that the IPR would duplicate parallel district‑court litigation.
patent denied · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
The PTAB upheld its denial of institution in IPR2025-00018, finding that a parallel district‑court trial and weak petition merits justified the decision. Patent Owner’s response reinforces the Director’s discretionary authority under § 314(d).
patent · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
Mullen Industries seeks Director Review to overturn the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against its 11,122,418 patent. The owner contends the Board misapplied Fintiv factors and should deny institution under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
patent denied · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00019
The USPTO denied Google and Samsung’s request for rehearing of a Director Review order that vacated the institution of an IPR against Mullen Industries. The denial applies to four related IPRs.
patent · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
An email from the PTAB Director notifies Google and Mullen Industries that Director Review requests for IPR2025-00018 and three related IPRs have been received. Google may file a concise response within five business days, with no new evidence allowed.
patent terminated or settled · Jul 10, 2024
MediaTek Inc. v.DAEDALUS PRIME LLC
· IPR2024-01488
MediaTek and Daedalus Prime have settled all disputes surrounding U.S. Patent 10,740,281. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review, citing the settlement and the lack of a merits decision. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317.
patent terminated or settled · Jul 10, 2024
MediaTek Inc. v.DAEDALUS PRIME LLC
· IPR2024-01488
MediaTek and Daedalus Prime reached a settlement, leading the PTAB to terminate the IPR on patent 10,740,281 after institution.
patent · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
Google and Samsung have filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 30 claims of Mullen Industries’ location‑sharing patent, arguing anticipation and obviousness over Sheha and a new set of Randall‑based grounds. The petition asserts no discretionary denial grounds and requests institution.
patent · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00019
Google and Samsung have filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all twenty claims of Mullen Industries’ location‑sharing patent, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art combinations and arguing no discretionary denial grounds exist.
patent · Jul 10, 2024
MediaTek Inc. v.DAEDALUS PRIME LLC
· IPR2024-01488
MediaTek has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 21 claims of Daedalus Prime’s ‘281 patent on the ground of obviousness over multiple prior‑art references, and asks the PTAB to institute the review.
patent · Jul 10, 2024
PreOmics GmbH et al. v.The Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Inc.
· IPR2024-01473
PreOmics and Biognosys have filed an IPR petition challenging 11 claims of the ’360 patent, asserting that the nanoparticle‑based protein assay is fully anticipated or obvious over prior publications by Hu, Cai, and Zaccaria.
patent instituted · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00019
Google LLC et al. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Mullen Industries LLC's patent on location services, despite initial concerns about discretionary denial. The Board found that Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing based on strong arguments regarding prior art obviousness and key claim construction terms.
patent instituted · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
Google LLC et al. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Mullen Industries LLC's patent covering location services and tracking. The Board found sufficient evidence of non-obviousness, despite parallel district court litigation, leading to the institution of all 30 claims.
patent denied · Jul 10, 2024
Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC
· IPR2025-00018
The Director denied institution of an Inter Partes Review (IPR) involving Google and Mullen Industries. The decision vacated the initial grant of institution based on a holistic review of Fintiv factors.
patent instituted · Jul 10, 2024
PreOmics GmbH et al. v.The Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Inc.
· IPR2024-01473
PreOmics GmbH et al. successfully petitioned for institution in the IPR against The Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Inc., challenging claims related to sensor arrays for protein corona analysis. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on grounds of anticipation (102) and obviousness (103).
patent final · Jul 10, 2024
PreOmics GmbH et al. v.The Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Inc.
· IPR2024-01473
The Board found that six claims (1, 4, 6, 17, 22, and 25) of the patent were unpatentable based on anticipation by prior art Cai. The decision hinged on a broad interpretation of key terms like 'biological sample' and 'subset of particles,' which favored the Petitioner's arguments regarding the scope of the claims.
patent terminated or settled · Jul 8, 2024
Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.
· IPR2024-01191
Wiz, Inc. and Orca Security Ltd. settled their inter partes review dispute over U.S. Patent 11,775,326, jointly moving to terminate the proceeding.
patent · Jul 8, 2024
Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.
· IPR2024-01191
Wiz, Inc. and Orca Security Ltd. jointly filed a request with the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement confidential, invoking 35 U.S.C. §317(b) and related regulations. The request seeks to limit access to the agreement to the parties and the Board.
