US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 187 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Porta Sophia v.Ellis, Greg
· IPR2025-01460
Porta Sophia petitions the PTAB to invalidate U.S. Patent 11,235,110 covering a vaporizer device for psychedelic compounds, asserting that the device, formulations, and isotopomer claims are fully anticipated or obvious by extensive prior‑art references.
patent
ToughBuilt Industries, Inc. v.Meridian International Co. Ltd.
· IPR2025-01462
ToughBuilt Industries petitions the PTAB to invalidate Meridian International’s ’689 patent covering a stackable storage system, asserting anticipation and obviousness over a suite of prior‑art latch references.
patent
Tesla, Inc. v.Bulletproof Property Management, LLC
· IPR2026-00227
Tesla has filed an IPR petition challenging all 18 claims of U.S. Patent 11,932,230, which covers vehicle gear‑selection control. The petition asserts obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and seeks institution of the review.
patent
Strategy Inc v.Web3AI Technologies, LLC
· IPR2026-00223
Strategy Inc (formerly MicroStrategy) has filed an IPR petition challenging all 25 claims of Web3AI's U.S. Patent 9,218,574 covering a user interface for machine‑learning results. The challenger alleges obviousness over a combination of four prior‑art references (Johnson, Lin, Purcell, Mihaylov) under § 103. No institution decision has been made yet.
patent
Topsoe, Inc. et al. v.CASALE SA
· IPR2025-01455
Topsoe petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑11 and 17‑19 of Casale’s ’168 patent covering ammonia synthesis from natural gas. The petition relies on anticipation and obviousness arguments using five prior‑art references. The Board has yet to decide whether to institute the review.
patent
Tesla, Inc. v.Bulletproof Property Management, LLC
· IPR2026-00228
Tesla has filed an IPR petition challenging all ten claims of its vehicle gear‑selection patent, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution of the review and a finding that the claims are unpatentable.
patent
Airwallex Pty. Ltd. et al. v.--
· IPR2025-01446
Airwallex has filed a petition for inter partes review seeking cancellation of all 16 claims of U.S. Patent 11,620,701, alleging obviousness over five prior‑art references. The petition follows multiple infringement lawsuits in Texas that rely on the same patent.
patent
Liberty Energy Inc. et al. v.U.S. Well Services, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-01445
Liberty Energy has petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against U.S. Well Services’ hydraulic fracturing patent, arguing that claims 1‑14 are obvious over multiple prior‑art references. The petition seeks cancellation of all challenged claims under 35 U.S.C. §103.
patent
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.
· IPR2026-00220
TSMC filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 8,076,735, asserting that all six claims are anticipated or obvious over prior art references Chuang, Lin, and Brask. The petition seeks cancellation of the claims.
patent
SNAP INC. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01375
Snap and Hisense have filed an IPR petition challenging Nokia’s ’267 video‑compression patent, asserting that the claims are obvious in view of prior art such as Wada and the Karczewicz applications. The petition seeks cancellation of all 36 claims.
patent
MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
· IPR2025-01384
Petitioners seek IPR cancellation of all 21 claims of Champion’s dual‑fuel lockout switch patent, arguing obviousness over DuroMax, Elsdon, Parlatore, Hallberg and a lack of structural support for key claim terms.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC
· IPR2025-01376
Samsung Electronics has filed an IPR petition challenging Radian Memory Systems’ ’995 patent covering flash‑memory address translation. The petition relies on Reiter, SCSI standards, Sinclair‑367 and Yamada to argue obviousness of 23 claims.
patent
Terumo BCT, Inc. v.Haemonetics Corporation
· IPR2025-01374
Terumo BCT has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of Haemonetics’ plasma‑collection patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition outlines five grounds based on Lavender and other patents.
patent
Nokia of America Corporation v.SPADA INNOVATIONS, INC.
· IPR2025-01442
Nokia of America has filed an inter partes review petition seeking cancellation of all nine claims of SPADA Innovations' ’142 patent, asserting that the claimed PON‑VRF combination is obvious over prior‑art standards and publications.
patent
Tesla, Inc. v.Bulletproof Property Management, LLC
· IPR2026-00219
Tesla has filed an IPR petition challenging the vehicle gear‑selection control patent owned by Bulletproof Property Management, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition lists six §103 grounds covering all 20 claims. The Board has yet to decide whether to institute the review.
patent
Medtronic, Inc. v.Moskowitz Family LLC
· IPR2026-00217
Medtronic has filed an IPR petition challenging 16 claims of Moskowitz Family’s spinal fusion patent, asserting that Palmatier anticipates the invention and that combined references render the remaining claims obvious.
patent
Medtronic, Inc. v.Moskowitz Family LLC
· IPR2026-00216
Medtronic has filed an IPR petition challenging 16 claims of the ’284 spinal fusion patent owned by Moskowitz Family. The challenger relies on Palmatier, Gordon and Glerum as prior art to argue anticipation and obviousness.
patent
Snap Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01439
Snap Inc. and Hisense have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 19 claims of Nokia’s video‑coding patent, arguing obviousness over Karczewicz and the MPEG‑1/H.263 combination.
patent
Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd. et al. v.TVnGo Ltd.
· IPR2026-00214
Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 19 claims of TVnGo’s RE50,399 patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over multiple interactive‑TV references. The petition requests that all challenged claims be found unpatentable.
patent
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.
· IPR2026-00211
Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 55 claims of Damaka’s ’116 patent covering modular video‑conferencing software. The petition relies on obviousness grounds over prior‑art references such as Abuan, Eisenberg, Beilis, and Guzman.
patent
Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd. et al. v.TVnGo Ltd.
· IPR2026-00213
Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of TVnGo’s RE50328 interactive‑TV patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition challenges 19 claims covering overlay graphics and TV‑Internet integration.
patent
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.
· IPR2026-00210
Cisco has filed an IPR petition challenging Damaka's U.S. Pat. 11,930,362, which covers modular video‑conferencing software. The petition asserts obviousness over a combination of five prior‑art references and requests the Board to institute a trial and cancel claims 1‑28 and 75.
patent
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.
· IPR2026-00207
Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 28 claims of Damaka’s U.S. 9,270,744 patent covering modular video‑conferencing software. The petition relies on four prior‑art references to argue obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
patent
Beatbot Technology (USA) Co. Ltd. et al. v.Zodiac Pool Systems LLC
· IPR2026-00200
Beatbot Technology petitions the PTAB to cancel all five claims of Zodiac Pool Systems' autonomous pool‑cleaner patent, asserting obviousness over a suite of prior‑art references and lack of written description for key limitations.
