US PTAB IP Litigation
2,587 annotated decisions
Page 22 of 108 · 2,587 total
Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.
Petitioner Wiz challenges Orca Security Ltd.'s patent claims regarding cloud asset security and snapshot analysis under 35 U.S.C. §103. Wiz argues that the claimed methods for threat detection, risk prioritization, and reporting are obvious combinations of existing prior art.
Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.
Wiz challenged Orca Security Ltd.'s cloud security patents, arguing that the claimed vulnerability scanning methods are obvious combinations of known techniques. The petitioner asserts that merging Veselov's snapshot scanning with Basavapatna's risk assessment renders the invention predictable.
Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.THROUGH TEK TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) CO., LTD. et al.
Reolink Innovation Inc. has filed an IPR Petition challenging patents held by THROUGH TEK TECHNOLOGY regarding Peer-to-Peer (P2P) connectivity for video streaming. The petitioner argues that the challenged claims are obvious over various combinations of prior art, including Lorex Manual and Kim941.
Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.THROUGH TEK TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) CO., LTD. et al.
Petitioner Reolink Innovation Inc. challenged U.S. Patent No. 10,602,448 covering remote wakeup systems in a PTAB petition. The challenge asserts that the patent is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103 based on various combinations of prior art references (Zhang, Zill, Liu).
Canadian Solar Inc. et al. v.Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.
Canadian Solar Inc. has initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.'s patent on back-contact solar cell technology. The petitioner argues that key claims are unpatentable due to obviousness when combining the patented structure with various prior art references.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Croga Innovations Ltd.
Cisco Systems initiated an Inter Partes Review against Croga Innovations Ltd.'s patent 10601780, challenging claims related to network security and virtualization. The petitioner successfully argued that the claimed features were obvious in view of prior art references, leading to the institution of the IPR proceedings.
DR. FALK PHARMA GMBH v.Ellodi Pharmaceuticals LP
Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH initiated an IPR challenge against Ellodi Pharmaceuticals LP concerning a patent covering oral/topical drug delivery systems. The petition asserts that the challenged claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103, citing prior art references including Dohil and Grother.
Hanwha Solutions Corporation v.Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd. et al.
Hanwha Solutions Corporation has filed a petition challenging Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.'s solar cell patent based on obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petitioner argues that the claimed features, such as FSF doping and gettering, are conventional and render the invention predictable when combined with existing prior art.
Hanwha Solutions Corporation v.Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.
Hanwha Solutions Corporation initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.'s solar cell fabrication patent (8878053). The petitioner argues that the claimed processes are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103 by combining known elements from prior art references like Froitzheim, Gan, and Smith. The Board noted that discretionary denial was unwarranted due to factors related to multiple petitions.
Hanwha Solutions Corporation v.Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.
Hanwha Solutions Corporation petitioned the PTAB challenging Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.'s solar cell patents based on obviousness (103). The petitioner argues that combining specific prior art references, such as Froitzheim and Gan, renders the claimed photovoltaic structures predictable and obvious to a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art. This petition addresses ongoing district court litigation between the parties.
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
Motorola Solutions challenged Stellar's U.S. Patent No. 7,593,034 in an IPR proceeding based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The petitioner argues that the claimed features of the video surveillance apparatus are rendered obvious by various combinations of prior art references like Yerazunis and Fiore. This challenge targets multiple claims related to data recording, wireless interfaces, and file indexing.
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
Motorola Solutions has filed an IPR challenging U.S. Patent No. 9,485,471 owned by Stellar, LLC. The petitioner asserts that the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on various combinations of prior art references. This challenge targets key features related to video surveillance and data buffering.
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
Motorola Solutions challenged Stellar LLC's '882 patent in a petition for review, asserting that the core features of surveillance video recording systems are obvious in light of existing prior art. The petitioner argues that combining references like Yerazunis with Fiore renders claims related to loop recording and file-based indexing unpatentable.
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. et al. v.Stellar, LLC
Motorola Solutions has filed an Inter Partes Review challenging Stellar, LLC's surveillance apparatus patent (9912914) on grounds of obviousness. The petitioner argues that the claimed features are merely combinations of existing prior art references related to video recording and data management.
Avanos Medical, Inc. v.Stratus Medical, LLC
Avanos Medical filed a Petition challenging Stratus Medical's RF neurotomy needle patent ('782 Patent). The central argument is that the claimed device is obvious because it merely combines conventional features from prior art references like Racz, Fitz, and Lee. This challenges 27 claims related to advanced medical ablation technology.
Avanos Medical, Inc. v.Stratus Medical, LLC
Avanos Medical challenged Stratus Medical's RF neurotomy needle patent, arguing that the claimed deployable filament features are obvious.
Avanos Medical, Inc. v.Stratus Medical, LLC
Avanos Medical challenges Stratus Medical's RF neurotomy needle claims at the PTAB, asserting obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Petitioner argues that combining multiple prior art references—including Racz, Fitz, and Lee—would have motivated a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art to create the claimed device.
Avanos Medical, Inc. v.Stratus Medical, LLC
Petitioner Avanos Medical challenges Stratus Medical's '664 Patent, asserting that all claimed features are obvious over various combinations of prior art references in RF ablation technology. The challenge rests entirely on statutory grounds of 35 U.S.C. § 103, utilizing multiple prior art patents related to neurotomy devices.
NXTGEN TOYS, LLC v.ZipString LLC
NXTGEN TOYS challenges ZipString LLC's string shooter patents (11674774) alleging infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103. The petitioner argues that the claimed features, particularly fibrous surface textures for drag generation, are anticipated or obvious based on prior art combining existing designs with known aerodynamic principles.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.ASUS Technology Licensing Inc.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. has filed a petition challenging 14 claims of ASUS Technology Licensing Inc.'s '658 patent, asserting obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The arguments center on combining various prior art references, including Lindh, Tooher, Kim, and 3GPP specifications, to demonstrate that the claimed LTE network methods were predictable.
CommScope Technologies LLC et al. v.Belden Canada ULC et al.
CommScope Technologies LLC initiated an Inter Partes Review challenging Belden Canada ULC's patent on modular fiber optic cassette systems. The petitioner asserts that the challenged claims are invalid based on anticipation (102) and obviousness (103). Specifically, they argue prior art references such as Fukui, Sauter, and Sedor render the claimed features unpatentable.
Deltran USA LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
Deltran USA LLC challenges The Noco Company's '203 patent, arguing that all 11 claimed features related to jump starter/battery charging technology are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Petitioner relies on combinations of prior art references like Richardson and Zhao to demonstrate the lack of inventive step in DC-DC conversion and USB charging apparatuses.
Olympus Corporation et al. v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC
Olympus Corporation et al. filed an IPR challenging 30 claims related to image aberration correction, arguing they are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petition relies heavily on prior art from Iwasawa and various secondary references like Enomoto and Ito.
Early Warning Services, LLC v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC
Early Warning Services challenges Intellectual Ventures II LLC's patent on secure transaction apparatuses, asserting that the claims are anticipated or rendered obvious by prior art. The petitioner relies heavily on references like Wang et al., Drummond, and TAO to establish grounds for unpatentability under 102 and 103. This initial petition sets up a broad challenge across multiple claim sets related to mobile authentication.