US PTAB IP Litigation
5,620 annotated decisions
Page 222 of 235 · 5,620 total
patent null · Feb 20, 2024
Ceva Sante Animal S.A. et al. v.Targan, Inc.
· IPR2024-00595
Ceva Santé Animale S.A. filed an IPR challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 10,806,124, asserting that the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petition relies on multiple combinations of prior art references (Gershman, Pierre, Yavnai, Tao) related to poultry sexing and image analysis.
patent null · Feb 20, 2024
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v.Identitii Limited
· IPR2024-00590
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. filed a petition challenging Identitii Limited's patent (10984413), arguing that the claims are obvious under Section 103. The petitioner contends that combining Smith and Seger renders nearly all claimed features predictable for POSITA in financial technology.
patent instituted · Feb 20, 2024
Ceva Sante Animal S.A. et al. v.Targan, Inc.
· IPR2024-00595
The PTAB decided to institute the IPR challenge against Targan, Inc.'s patent (10806124), finding that the Petitioner presented new and non-cumulative prior art combinations. The case involves poultry production technology, with Ceva Sante Animal S.A. as the petitioner.
patent denied · Feb 20, 2024
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v.Identitii Limited
· IPR2024-00593
The PTAB denied JPMorgan Chase Bank's IPR against Identitii Limited, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds over prior art references like Kennedy and Kurani-816.
patent final · Feb 20, 2024
Ceva Sante Animal S.A. et al. v.Targan, Inc.
· IPR2024-00595
The PTAB found that claims 1-15 of the patent are unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. The Board's construction of 'unrestrained chick' was crucial, defining it as a chick free to open its wings on the moving platform.
patent denied · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00438
The Board denied Comcast’s request for Director Review of the Final Written Decision in the IPR concerning Entropic Communications’ patent 11,399,206. The denial applies to three related IPRs filed by the same parties.
patent · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00441
Entropic Communications seeks Director review of an IPR where the PTAB declared all 18 claims of its cable‑broadband patent unpatentable. The owner alleges procedural abuse, invented arguments, and inconsistent rulings with a related IPR. It requests reversal and termination of the proceeding.
patent · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00435
Comcast submits an authorized response urging denial of Entropic’s request for Director Review of the IPR’s Final Written Decision, asserting no abuse of discretion and that the Board’s explanation of the Zhang reference satisfies the required memorandum.
patent · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00432
Comcast opposes Entropic Communications' request to file new exhibits after PTAB final decisions in three IPRs, arguing the request is untimely and unsupported. The board has been asked to deny the request.
patent · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00435
Entropic Communications has requested Director Review of the IPR involving Comcast’s challenge to patent 11,381,866. Comcast may file a concise, evidence‑free response within five business days, and no additional briefing is permitted.
patent null · Feb 16, 2024
Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation
· IPR2024-00582
Valve Corporation initiated an IPR challenging the '738 patent owned by Immersion Corporation, focusing on haptic feedback systems. The petitioner argues that various prior art references, including Pratt and Ku, anticipate or render the challenged claims obvious under 102 and 103. This is a foundational challenge to the patent's validity in consumer electronics technology.
patent null · Feb 16, 2024
Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. et al. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00570
Sony Interactive Entertainment and Sony Group Corporation filed a Petition challenging 13 claims of Resonant Systems' U.S. Patent No. 9,941,830. The challenge centers on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103), arguing that the claimed linear vibration actuators are predictable combinations of prior art in haptics and control systems.
patent null · Feb 16, 2024
Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. et al. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00569
Sony Interactive Entertainment filed an IPR challenging U.S. Patent No. 8,860,337 covering vibration generation/haptics technology. The petition asserts that the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103 based on combinations of prior art references like Houston and Goldenberg.
patent null · Feb 16, 2024
Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. et al. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00568
Sony Interactive Entertainment filed a petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 9,369,081 regarding linear vibration actuators used in haptics/feedback devices. The petitioner asserts that the claimed features are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 by combining multiple prior art references. This is an early-stage challenge setting the stage for a detailed examination of the patent's validity.
patent null · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00435
Comcast Cable Communications challenged Entropic's patent (11381866) in an IPR, asserting that the claims are anticipated or obvious over various prior art references. The petitioner argues that Zhang anticipates key features and combinations of Zhang with Reisman, Jackson, and Pandey render other claims obvious. The Board has instituted the proceeding based on these compelling unpatentability challenges.
patent denied · Feb 16, 2024
Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. et al. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00569
The PTAB denied institution for IPR2024-00569, finding that Sony Interactive Entertainment failed to show a reasonable likelihood of success on its challenged claims regarding vibration modules and actuators. The Board sided with the Patent Owner (Resonant Systems) by upholding the requirement for an algorithmic step in the 'control component' structure.
patent instituted · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00441
The PTAB institution decision found that the Petitioner successfully demonstrated unpatentability of numerous claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board relied heavily on combinations of prior art references, notably Kamieniecki and Konstantinos, to support its findings against the patent owner. This outcome significantly strengthens the petitioner's position in the ongoing litigation.
patent denied · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00437
The PTAB denied Comcast's request to institute an IPR against Entropic's patent, citing the existence of a parallel petition. The Board determined that one petition was sufficient and denying the second would prevent unnecessary burden.
patent instituted · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00435
The PTAB instituted the IPR, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for Comcast's claims against Entropic Communications. The grounds centered on anticipation and obviousness using prior art references like Zhang, Reisman, Jackson, and Pandey.
patent denied · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00434
The PTAB denied Comcast's request to institute IPR against Entropic's wideband tuner patent (9210362) because the petitioner had filed a parallel petition on the same claims.
patent final · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00441
The IPR concluded that the Petitioner successfully demonstrated claims 1-18 were unpatentable over prior art references based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board found a clear motivation to combine Kamieniecki and Konstantinos, overcoming the Patent Owner's arguments regarding redesign complexity.
patent final · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00435
The PTAB found all 82 challenged claims unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. The Petitioner successfully argued that Zhang et al. anticipates or renders obvious the claims through various combinations with Reisman, Jackson, and Pandey. Key findings included that Zhang's demultiplexer/selector satisfies the DFE limitation, and 'concurrently' does not require zero delay.
patent Final Written Decision · Feb 16, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00432
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 20 claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,210,362 unpatentable. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that the patent was anticipated or obvious over prior art references, primarily Zhang et al., in combination with other cited references.
patent · Feb 15, 2024
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
· IPR2024-00452
Comcast has filed a Director Review Request challenging the PTAB’s denial of institution in IPR2024-00452, asserting the Board misapplied KSR precedent and case law on motivation and bodily incorporation. The petition references Intel decisions and a related institution ruling on another patent.
