US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 180 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00042
Merck challenges Halozyme’s broad PH20 hyaluronidase patent, asserting lack of written description, enablement, and obviousness. The petition seeks to invalidate all 40 claims.
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00039
Merck has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,104,185 covering modified PH20 hyaluronidase proteins. The petition argues the claims are overly broad, lack written description and enablement, and are obvious in view of prior art. The case is pending institution.
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00030
Merck has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent No. 12,054,758 covering engineered PH20 hyaluronidase proteins, arguing lack of written description, enablement, and obviousness.
patent
Alliance Laundry Systems, LLC v.PayRange LLC.
· PGR2025-00028
Alliance Laundry Systems petitions the PTAB to review PayRange’s 2024 patent covering mobile‑device‑driven vending‑machine payments. The petition asserts anticipation, obviousness, and § 101 ineligibility for all 20 claims, citing Low, Arora, Freeny and Casey as prior art.
patent
Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc. v.Spruce Biosciences, Inc.
· PGR2025-00032
Neurocrine Biosciences petitions the PTAB to invalidate Spruce Biosciences’ 12,115,166 patent covering a broad genus of CRF1 receptor antagonists for CAH, arguing lack of written description and enablement.
patent
Alliance Laundry Systems, LLC v.PayRange LLC.
· PGR2025-00027
Alliance Laundry Systems petitions the PTAB to invalidate PayRange’s 2024 mobile‑payment patent covering vending‑machine transactions, arguing obviousness and patent‑ineligibility. The petition also rebuts any discretionary denial.
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00024
Merck has filed a PGR petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,060,590 covering thousands of engineered PH20 hyaluronidase variants, asserting lack of written description, enablement, and obviousness.
patent
Multi-Color Corporation v.Brook & Whittle Ltd.
· PGR2025-00025
Multi-Color Corp. has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of Brook & Whittle’s recyclable shrink‑label patent, alleging anticipation, obviousness, and indefiniteness.
patent
Tesla, Inc. v.Perceptive Automata LLC
· IPR2025-01577
Tesla has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 23 claims of Perceptive Automata’s autonomous‑vehicle patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior‑art machine‑learning and sensor‑fusion publications such as Djuric, Zhu, Cox, and Ross.
patent
ITM Isotope Technologies Munich SE v.The Johns Hopkins University et al.
· PGR2025-00012
ITM Isotope Technologies Munich SE petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims of Johns Hopkins' ’201 patent covering low‑molecular‑weight FAP‑α imaging agents, arguing obviousness, lack of enablement, insufficient written description, and indefiniteness.
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00009
Merck has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,123,035 covering PH20 hyaluronidase mutants. The petition asserts lack of written description, lack of enablement, and obviousness of the claims. The Board has yet to decide whether to institute the trial.
patent
Intelligent Wellhead Systems, Inc. et al. v.Downing Wellhead Equipment, LLC et al.
· PGR2025-00002
Intelligent Wellhead Systems has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of all 78 claims of Downing's hydraulic fracturing patent, arguing the claims are abstract, lack written description, contain new matter, and are obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
patent
Senko Advanced Components, Inc. v.US Conec Ltd.
· PGR2024-00046
Senko Advanced Components petitions the PTAB to invalidate US Conec's 11,808,994 patent covering small form‑factor fiber‑optic connectors, alleging indefiniteness, lack of written description, anticipation and obviousness over numerous prior‑art references.
patent
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00003
Merck has filed a post‑grant review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Pat. 11,952,600, arguing that the claims lack written description, are not enabled, and are obvious over prior art.
patent
UATP IP, LLC et al. v.Slick Slide LLC
· PGR2024-00054
UATP IP petitions PTAB to invalidate Slick Slide's low‑friction slide patent, asserting obviousness over Phillips, Fallgatter, and a nylon‑mesh product, plus lack of enablement and indefiniteness. The petition seeks institution and a finding that the challenged claims are unpatentable.
patent
Ecto World, LLC d/b/a Demand Vape et al. v.RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. et al.
· PGR2024-00049
Ecto World petitions PTAB to invalidate RAI Strategic's 2024 electronic‑cigarette patent, arguing lack of written description and obviousness over Takeuchi, Kim, Pienemann and Susa. The petition seeks institution and opposes discretionary denial.
patent
Therabody, Inc. v.Hyperice IP Subco, LLC et al.
· PGR2024-00053
Therabody has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of 14 claims of Hyperice’s percussive‑massager patent, alleging lack of written description, indefiniteness, and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
patent
Tesla, Inc. v.Perceptive Automata LLC
· IPR2025-01575
Tesla has filed an IPR petition challenging Perceptive Automata’s AI‑driven image‑analysis patent (U.S. 11,753,046). The petition asserts obviousness over four prior‑art references and argues that many claim elements are non‑patentable printed matter.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
· PGR2024-00031
Samsung has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of all 16 claims of Oura’s wearable ring patent, arguing obviousness over three prior‑art references and urging the Board not to deny institution.
patent
Godbersen-Smith Construction Company d/b/a GOMACO Corporation v.Guntert & Zimmerman Const. Div., Inc.
· PGR2024-00026
GOMACO has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑7 of its ‘723 slipform paver patent. The petition alleges obviousness over the CIII manual, Rio and Files patents, and a lack of written description for a transducer placement. The Board has yet to decide whether to institute the proceeding.
patent
Voltage, LLC et al. v.Shoals Technologies Group, LLC
· PGR2024-00022
Voltage, LLC has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate Shoals Technologies' U.S. Patent 11,689,153 covering solar lead assemblies. The petition alleges obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and indefiniteness under § 112. The Board must decide whether to institute the review.
patent
LUMI LEGEND CORPORATION v.Manehu Product Alliance, LLC
· PGR2024-00014
Lumi Legend has filed a PGR petition seeking cancellation of claims 33‑36 of U.S. Patent 11,781,703, alleging lack of written description, indefiniteness, anticipation, and obviousness. The petition relies on prior art such as Clary, Juan, Pankros, Tsuji, and Xu. It also argues the patent is eligible for PGR and urges the Board not to deny institution.
patent
Toyota Motor Corporation et al. v.BUNKER HILL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
· IPR2026-00333
Toyota has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 17 claims of Bunker Hill’s ’508 hybrid‑drive patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition relies on a technical expert declaration and argues no secondary considerations exist.
patent
Nexus Pharmaceuticals LLC v.Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC
· PGR2024-00016
Nexus Pharmaceuticals has filed a PGR petition challenging all 30 claims of Exela Pharma Sciences' L‑cysteine parenteral nutrition patent, asserting lack of enablement, insufficient written description, and, alternatively, obviousness over the Sandoz label.
