US PTAB IP Litigation
5,620 annotated decisions
Page 184 of 235 · 5,620 total
patent denied · May 31, 2024
AT&T Services Inc. et al. v.Innovative Sonic Limited
· IPR2024-00991
AT&T Services Inc. failed to convince the PTAB that its claims were unpatentable over prior art references Centonza and Han. The Board denied institution, finding no reasonable likelihood of prevailing on either anticipation or obviousness grounds. This decision maintains the validity of Innovative Sonic Limited's patent in cellular network connectivity.
patent instituted · May 31, 2024
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
· IPR2024-00989
The PTAB instituted the IPR petition filed by Juniper Networks against Portsmouth Network Corporation, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds. The Board specifically accepted arguments that challenged claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and others based on obviousness over Blease in view of Weyman and Hu.
patent denied · May 31, 2024
IKEA Supply AG et al. v.Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-00988
The PTAB denied institution for an IPR petition challenging claims in a semiconductor device patent, citing failure to meet the particularity requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 312(a)(3). The Board found that several grounds were voluminous and excessive, particularly those involving complex prior art combinations.
patent instituted · May 31, 2024
Ericsson Inc. et al. v.Active Wireless Technologies LLC
· IPR2024-00951
The PTAB granted institution for Ericsson Inc. et al.'s IPR challenge against Active Wireless Technologies LLC, finding compelling evidence of unpatentability under 102 and 103. The Board determined that the preliminary record supported a meritorious challenge regarding HARQ-ACK feedback mechanisms in 5G NR PUCCH format adaptation.
patent denied · May 31, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
· IPR2024-00929
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR filed by Samsung against Oura Health because the patent owner had formally disclaimed all 12 challenged claims.
patent instituted · May 31, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
· IPR2024-00928
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Samsung against Oura Health regarding the 'Wearable Computing Device' patent (9582034). The Board found a reasonable likelihood that Samsung would prevail on grounds of obviousness over LeBoeuf.
patent final · May 31, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
· IPR2024-00928
The PTAB found that several claims related to finger-worn monitoring devices were unpatentable over prior art combinations. The Board adopted a narrow claim construction for 'substantially transparent external potting,' which aided the Petitioner's argument of obviousness.
patent Final Written Decision · May 31, 2024
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
· IPR2024-00913
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that ten of the fifteen challenged claims were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on various combinations of prior art references (Blease, Weyman, Hu, Deng). The Board found sufficient motivation to combine Blease and Weyman for distributed architecture features, while also finding that combining Blease/Weyman with Hu was plausible for bandwidth efficiency improvements.
patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld · May 30, 2024
WEATHERFORD U.S., L.P. et al. v.Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00990
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision in IPR2024‑00990, finding Halliburton’s claims 11,12 and 14‑20 unpatentable and also striking substitute claims 29‑37, while upholding claims 1‑10 and 21‑23. Halliburton has appealed the decision to the Federal Circuit.
patent denied · May 30, 2024
WEATHERFORD U.S., L.P. et al. v.Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00990
Weatherford files an authorized response urging the PTAB to deny Halliburton’s Director Review Request, asserting the Board’s findings on claims 14, 29‑31, and 33 are well‑founded and that the patent owner’s arguments misinterpret the claim language and prior art.
patent · May 30, 2024
WEATHERFORD U.S., L.P. et al. v.Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00990
Halliburton seeks Director Review of a PTAB decision that found several gravel‑packing screen claims unpatentable, arguing the Board misread claim language, offered no motivation for its combination, and abused its discretion.
patent · May 30, 2024
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
· IPR2024-00954
Cisco seeks Director Review of a PTAB denial that found its VPLS failover claims un‑obvious over the Mitchell reference. The petition alleges the Board improperly added claim limitations, applied the wrong obviousness standard, and ignored the modified prior‑art embodiment.
patent denied · May 30, 2024
WEATHERFORD U.S., L.P. et al. v.Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00990
The USPTO denied Weatherford's request for Director Review of the Final Written Decision in IPR2024-00990 concerning Halliburton's oilfield patent 11,333,007 B2.
patent · May 30, 2024
Nokia of America Corporation et al. v.Iarnach Technologies Limited
· IPR2024-00899
Iarnach Technologies seeks denial of an IPR filed by Nokia and AT&T over U.S. Patent 9,806,892 covering direct power‑state transitions in passive optical networks. The owner argues the cited references do not disclose such transitions and invokes Fintiv discretionary denial factors due to parallel district‑court cases.
patent null · May 30, 2024
WEATHERFORD U.S., L.P. et al. v.Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00990
Weatherford U.S., L.P. has initiated an IPR challenge against Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.'s patent covering gravel packing systems for oil and gas applications. The petitioner asserts that the claimed technology is obvious over prior art developed by ExxonMobil/Mobil research groups dating back to the 1990s. This action targets multiple claims related to differential pressure shunt tubes and screen geometry.
patent · May 30, 2024
Apple Inc. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00983
Apple Inc. has filed a Petition challenging the '882 Patent owned by Resonant Systems, Inc., asserting multiple grounds of obviousness (§103). The challenge focuses on combining various prior art references—including Alexander and Cosper—to demonstrate that the patented vibration control technology is predictable.
patent null · May 30, 2024
Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.
· IPR2024-00980
Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. has filed a petition challenging CLO Virtual Fashion's patent (11222448) on grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner argues that the claimed features, related to real-time measurement guides in CAD software, are predictable combinations of existing technologies like Grinspun and Graphicxtras.
patent · May 30, 2024
Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.
· IPR2024-00970
Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. has filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 10,733,773 owned by CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc. The petitioner asserts that the challenged claims are obvious based on combinations of existing CAD software and prior art publications.
This challenge focuses on whether combining known techniques with EZBRUSH software yields predictable improvements in garment patterning.
patent null · May 30, 2024
Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.
· IPR2024-00967
Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. challenged CLO Virtual Fashion's patent on digital design methods, arguing the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner asserts that combining prior art references related to CAD systems renders the claimed apparatus and method predictable.
patent · May 30, 2024
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
· IPR2024-00954
Cisco Systems has filed an IPR petition challenging the validity of Portsmouth Network Corporation's '637 Patent claims related to fast link failover systems for network communication failures. The petitioner asserts that the invention is obvious over various combinations of prior art references, primarily Mitchell.
patent null · May 30, 2024
Nokia of America Corporation et al. v.Iarnach Technologies Limited
· IPR2024-00899
Nokia filed a petition challenging claims in the '892 Patent, asserting obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103. The challenge focuses on combining prior art standards (ITU-T) and publications to demonstrate that claimed power management features are predictable.
patent null · May 30, 2024
Nokia of America Corporation et al. v.Iarnach Technologies Limited
· IPR2024-00899
Petitioners challenged U.S. Patent No. 9,806,892 in a PTAB petition, arguing that several claims related to power management in optical networks are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103. The arguments rely on combining industry standards (G.987.3, G.988) with technical disclosures from prior art references like Röger and Ghazisaidi.
patent instituted · May 30, 2024
WEATHERFORD U.S., L.P. et al. v.Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00990
Weatherford U.S., L.P. successfully petitioned the PTAB to challenge Halliburton Energy Services' patent (11333007) regarding wellbore gravel packing technology. The Board granted institution, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds (§ 103).
patent instituted · May 30, 2024
Apple Inc. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00983
Apple Inc.'s IPR challenge against Resonant Systems, Inc. was instituted after the Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim. The grounds for institution were multiple obviousness rejections (103) over various prior art combinations in electromechanical devices. This decision moves the dispute into trial phase proceedings.
