US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 217 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent denied · Sep 20, 2024
SAP America, Inc. et al. v.Cyandia, Inc.
· IPR2024-01432
The USPTO denied SAP America’s request for director review of the institution decisions in three IPRs, including the challenge to Cyandia’s patent 8,751,948. The order affirms the earlier denial of institution.
patent terminated or settled · Sep 20, 2024
Aktana, Inc v.Veeva Systems Inc.
· IPR2024-01443
Aktana and Veeva have settled all disputes over U.S. Patent 9,055,023 and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR, which had not yet been instituted.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01405
Court decision.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
SAP America, Inc. et al. v.Cyandia, Inc.
· IPR2024-01433
SAP America has been notified that Cyandia’s request for Director Review in IPR2024‑01433 is pending, with a tight five‑day response window and no new evidence allowed.
patent denied · Sep 20, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01403
The PTAB denied Samsung's petitions for Director Review of institution decisions in four IPRs, keeping the institution rulings intact.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
SAP America, Inc. et al. v.Cyandia, Inc.
· IPR2024-01432
SAP America has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 16 claims of Cyandia’s ’948 patent, arguing that the claims are obvious over IBM WebSphere documentation combined with the Austin‑Lane publication.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01461
Solus Advanced Materials petitions an IPR against SK nexilis’s 10,811,689 patent covering electrolytic copper foil for lithium‑ion batteries, asserting that claims 1‑10 are obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01460
Solus Advanced Materials has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all eleven claims of SK nexilis’s 2019 copper‑foil patent, arguing that the claimed surface‑roughness parameters and protective‑layer features are obvious in view of multiple prior‑art references.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Ericsson Inc et al. v.Headwater Partners II LLC
· IPR2024-01468
Ericsson, Nokia, T‑Mobile, AT&T and Verizon have petitioned the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑34 of U.S. Patent 9,094,868, arguing that the invention is obvious over earlier patents by Jarvinen and Fox. The petition seeks institution of an inter‑partes review and cancellation of the claims.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
SAP America, Inc. et al. v.Cyandia, Inc.
· IPR2024-01433
SAP America has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 16 claims of Cyandia’s 2014 patent on secure information delivery, arguing lack of written‑description support and obviousness over a PCT publication combined with Austin‑Lane. The petition also challenges potential discretionary denials under §325(d) and Fintiv.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01462
Solus Advanced Materials petitions to invalidate SK nexilis’s 2022 electrolytic copper foil patent, asserting that all eight claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution of an IPR and argues that no secondary considerations exist to rescue the claims.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01463
Solus Advanced Materials petitions to invalidate SK nexilis' 11,591,706 copper‑foil patent, asserting that all ten claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art references. The petition argues against discretionary denial and seeks cancellation of the claims.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Aktana, Inc v.Veeva Systems Inc.
· IPR2024-01444
Aktana has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 17 claims of Veeva's email‑control patent, arguing obviousness over a set of prior‑art publications and urging the Board to institute the review.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Aktana, Inc v.Veeva Systems Inc.
· IPR2024-01443
Aktana has filed an IPR petition challenging 22 claims of Veeva's email‑control patent, asserting obviousness over a set of prior‑art publications. The petition argues that discretionary factors strongly favor institution.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Axion Biosystems, Inc. v.Agilent Technologies, Inc.
· IPR2024-01467
Axion Biosystems petitions the PTAB to institute an IPR against Agilent’s ’508 patent, asserting that prior‑art Xu‑752 and Jones render all 30 claims obvious or anticipated. The petition seeks cancellation of the entire claim set.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01403
Samsung seeks IPR institution to invalidate Harbor Island Dynamic’s 7,772,673 patent covering deep‑trench isolation with chamfered corners, arguing the claims are obvious or anticipated by prior art such as Yin, Koshimizu, and Norström.
patent · Sep 20, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Harbor Island Dynamic, LLC
· IPR2024-01405
Samsung Electronics petitions the PTAB to institute an IPR against Harbor Island Dynamic’s 9,245,826 patent covering anchor vias for backside metal adhesion, arguing that all 20 claims are anticipated or obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
patent instituted · Sep 20, 2024
Ericsson Inc et al. v.Headwater Partners II LLC
· IPR2024-01468
Ericsson Inc et al. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Headwater Partners II LLC's patent (9094868), challenging claims 11-15 on obviousness grounds. The PTAB found a reasonable likelihood that the claimed link quality estimation would have been obvious over Jarvinen and Fox.
patent instituted · Sep 20, 2024
Axion Biosystems, Inc. v.Agilent Technologies, Inc.
· IPR2024-01467
Axion Biosystems successfully navigated the Institution Decision phase in its IPR against Agilent Technologies, leading to the trial of key claims. The Board declined to deny institution, allowing the dispute over cell monitoring and impedance analysis technology to proceed to litigation.
patent instituted · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01463
The PTAB institution decision found that the Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing, instituting trial on all 10 claims. The grounds centered on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103), arguing that specific properties of electrolytic copper foil could be achieved by combining various prior art references.
patent denied · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01463
The Director denied institution of Inter Partes Review in a dispute between Solus Advanced Materials and SK Nexilis, citing the Fintiv holistic assessment.
patent denied · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01462
The PTAB denied the institution of an IPR challenge brought by Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. against SK nexilis Co., Ltd.'s patent, finding insufficient evidence to support obviousness claims. The Board rejected the petitioner's reliance on hindsight bias when attempting to combine prior art references.
patent denied · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01462
The PTAB denied Solus Advanced Materials' request for rehearing, upholding the initial decision to deny institution of IPR against SK nexilis regarding surface roughness claims. The Board found insufficient evidence of motivation to combine prior art references.
patent denied · Sep 20, 2024
Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al. v.SK nexilis Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-01461
The PTAB denied Solus Advanced Materials' IPR challenges against SK nexilis regarding claims covering electrolytic copper foils for secondary batteries. The Board found that Petitioner failed to establish a reasonable likelihood of prevailing, particularly rejecting conclusory expert testimony used to bridge prior art gaps.
