US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 188 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Paragon 28, Inc. v.TREACE MEDICAL CONCEPTS, INC.
· IPR2026-00194
Paragon 28, Inc. has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 30 claims of Treace Medical’s bunion‑correction patent, arguing that the claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
patent
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.
· IPR2026-00206
Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Damaka’s U.S. 9,027,032 patent covering modular video‑conferencing functionality. The petition relies on obviousness over four prior‑art references that disclose similar APIs, function blocks, and authentication mechanisms.
patent
Beatbot Technology (USA) Co. Ltd. et al. v.Zodiac Pool Systems LLC
· IPR2026-00202
Beatbot Technology petitions the PTAB to invalidate Zodiac Pool Systems' pool‑cleaner patent, arguing that claims 1‑3 are obvious over a combination of existing underwater cleaning robots and lack written‑description support for key controller features.
patent
Amazon.com Services LLC et al. v.InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc. et al.
· IPR2026-00192
Amazon has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 17 claims of InterDigital’s ’606 video‑encoding patent, asserting obviousness over Sekiguchi, VCEG‑AJ21, Xiong and H.264. The petition details extensive claim‑by‑claim analysis linking each limitation to the prior art.
patent
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.InterDigital Madison Patent Holdings, SAS et al.
· IPR2026-00195
Amazon has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of four claims of InterDigital’s HEVC‑related ’877 patent, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references under 35 U.S.C. §103.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC
· IPR2025-01378
Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging Radian’s ’657 patent covering flash memory address translation, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior‑art flash controllers and SCSI standards.
patent
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Golden Eye Technologies LLC
· IPR2026-00186
Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑4 and 9‑11 of Golden Eye’s ’556 Wi‑Fi scanning patent, arguing that the claims are obvious over three earlier patents. The petition emphasizes that the patent was allowed despite acknowledging the same prior‑art concepts.
patent
Halozyme, Inc. v.Alteogen Inc.
· IPR2026-00176
Halozyme has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 15 claims of Alteogen’s 2025 ‘638 patent covering a temperature‑shift method for producing recombinant hyaluronidase PH20. The petition relies on obviousness over prior art Wei and Zmuda, with a second ground adding Wei 2013.
patent
Microsoft Corporation v.Qomplx LLC
· IPR2026-00183
Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging claims 1 and 4 of Qomplx’s 2022 cloud‑telemetry patent, asserting obviousness over prior‑art references describing virtual appliances and cloud agents. The petition seeks institution of the review.
patent
Microsoft Corporation v.Sandpiper CDN, LLC
· IPR2026-00180
Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 10,701,173, which covers CDN cache‑policy methods. The petition alleges obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and seeks cancellation of all fourteen claims.
patent
Google LLC v.Clear Imaging Research LLC
· IPR2026-00181
Google petitions the PTAB to invalidate Clear Imaging’s 32‑claim video‑stabilization patent, alleging obviousness over four prior‑art references and arguing claim‑term constructions. The petition seeks cancellation of all claims.
patent
Microsoft Corporation v.Qomplx LLC
· IPR2026-00182
Microsoft has filed a petition for inter partes review of Qomplx’s U.S. Patent 12,218,934 covering contextual, risk‑based multi‑factor authentication. The petition asserts that claims 1‑30 are obvious over prior art including the Kirti patent, the Coffin textbook, and Vemulapalli’s virtual‑machine teachings. No objective evidence of non‑obviousness is presented.
patent
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. et al. v.Genzyme Corporation et al.
· IPR2026-00166
Sarepta filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 27 claims of Genzyme’s ’313 patent covering AAV detection methods. The petition asserts obviousness over four pre‑grant publications describing LC‑MS and RP‑HPLC techniques for viral proteins.
patent
Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC
· IPR2026-00171
Ford Motor Company has filed an IPR petition challenging AutoConnect’s U.S. 9,082,239 vehicle‑infotainment patent, asserting that all 35 claims are obvious over existing vehicle‑technology disclosures.
patent
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v.Reed Semiconductor Corp.
· IPR2026-00165
Monolithic Power Systems filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate four claims of Reed Semiconductor’s ’955 patent as obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
patent
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. et al. v.Genzyme Corporation et al.
· IPR2026-00167
Sarepta Therapeutics has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑20 of Genzyme’s ‘377 patent on AAV detection methods, arguing the claims are obvious over four prior‑art references. The petition details three grounds of obviousness and asserts no secondary considerations outweigh the evidence.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.KIWI Intellectual Assets Corporation
· IPR2026-00164
Samsung Electronics has filed an IPR petition challenging KIWI’s RE50,307 USB socket patent, asserting that all 93 claims are obvious over prior‑art references such as Andre, Lufan, Yuming, Lee, Yen, Zhenyu and USB 3.0. The petition seeks cancellation of the entire patent.
patent
Medtronic, Inc. v.Moskowitz Family LLC
· IPR2026-00162
Medtronic has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 8, 9, 13, and 17‑21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,011,367, which cover a zero‑profile expandable intervertebral spacer. The petition relies on the Palmatier patent as prior art to argue anticipation and obviousness.
patent
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. et al. v.Genzyme Corporation et al.
· IPR2026-00149
Sarepta has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate Genzyme’s ’326 patent on AAV analytical ultracentrifugation, asserting that the claimed methods are obvious in view of earlier publications by Le Bec and de la Maza, supported by Cole and Sommer.
patent
Amazon.com Services LLC v.Smart Speaker LLC
· IPR2026-00148
Amazon has filed an IPR petition challenging Smart Speaker's ’590 patent covering smart‑meter appliances. The petition alleges obviousness over multiple prior‑art references for all 62 claims. The Board has not yet ruled on the petition.
patent
Ebury Partners UK Ltd. v.--
· IPR2026-00152
Ebury Partners UK Ltd. petitions the PTAB to invalidate 16 claims of Intercurrency Software’s ‘701 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art trading systems (Calo, Rude, Sellberg, Szoc, Davidowitz).
patent
Target Corporation v.HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC
· IPR2026-00153
Target Corporation has filed an IPR against HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC’s U.S. Patent 10,321,320 covering a wireless network buffered messaging system. The petition asserts that all 18 claims are obvious over the 3GPP MMS standard and related prior art. The request seeks cancellation of the entire patent.
patent
Citadel Securities LLC v.HFT Solutions, LLC
· IPR2026-00151
Citadel Securities petitions the PTAB to invalidate 11 claims of HFT Solutions' FPGA‑PLL synchronization patent, asserting that the invention was already disclosed in Altera’s white paper and related technical manuals, as well as a 2012 academic paper on low‑latency trading.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC
· IPR2025-01377
Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging all 23 claims of Radian’s ’656 flash‑memory controller patent, asserting obviousness over Reiter, SCSI standards and other prior art. The petition outlines five statutory grounds under 35 U.S.C. §103. The proceeding is currently at the petition stage.
