US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 236 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Aug 23, 2024
Genius Sports v.SportsCastr Inc.
· IPR2024-01311
Genius Sports has filed an IPR petition challenging SportsCastr’s U.S. Patent 11,039,218, asserting that claims 16‑30 are obvious or anticipated over Ellis, Spivey, and Herzog references and urging the Board to institute the review.
patent · Aug 23, 2024
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
· IPR2024-01310
Genius Sports has filed an IPR petition challenging all 15 claims of SportsCastr’s U.S. Patent 11,039,218, arguing they are obvious over Ellis, Spivey, and Herzog. The petitioner seeks institution and argues the Board should not deny discretionally.
patent · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01342
TikTok has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate NTECH's U.S. Patent 8,886,753, which covers personalized media programming. The petition relies on three obviousness grounds using Whitehead, Marcus ’904, and Cristofalo references. Institution of the IPR is requested.
patent · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01340
TikTok has filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 8,145,704, asserting that prior art references Whitehead, Cristofalo and Marcus ’904 make all 24 claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petition also argues that the Board should not exercise discretionary denial.
patent · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01339
TikTok has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of NTECH's video‑recommendation patent, asserting that the invention is obvious over earlier systems such as Marcus156 and Harbick.
patent · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01338
TikTok has filed an IPR petition challenging NTECH’s U.S. Pat. 8,875,185, asserting that the claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art video‑programming references. The petition seeks institution and argues that discretionary denial is unwarranted.
patent · Aug 23, 2024
UiPath, Inc. v.Rule 14 LLC
· IPR2024-01306
UiPath petitions the PTAB to institute an IPR against Rule 14’s ’712 data‑mining patent, arguing lack of written‑description support and obviousness over a broad set of prior art covering collection selection and non‑textual data queries.
patent · Aug 23, 2024
Alamar Biosciences, Inc. v.Olink Proteomics AB et al.
· IPR2024-01353
Alamar Biosciences petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑20 of Olink's 7,883,848 patent, arguing they are obvious over prior art combinations such as Kanan/Neri and Baez/Landegren. The petitioner asserts the examiner omitted critical references and that no discretionary factors justify denial.
patent instituted · Aug 23, 2024
Alamar Biosciences, Inc. v.Olink Proteomics AB et al.
· IPR2024-01353
Alamar Biosciences challenged Olink Proteomics' patent on grounds of obviousness (103), leading the PTAB to institute proceedings for claims 1-20. The Board found sufficient evidence that at least some claimed inventions are unpatentable, initiating a trial phase.
patent denied · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01343
TikTok Inc.'s attempt to invalidate NTECH Properties' patents based on obviousness was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that TikTok failed to adequately explain how its technology satisfied the claim limitations over cited prior art, specifically regarding media feed selection.
patent denied · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01341
TikTok Inc.'s IPR challenge against NTECH Properties failed, as the PTAB found insufficient evidence to establish obviousness over cited prior art. The Board rejected all grounds, concluding that TikTok could not satisfy the claim limitations using Whitehead or Cristofalo/Marcus '904.
patent instituted · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01342
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for TikTok against NTECH's patent 8886753, allowing trial on claims 1-10. The challenge centers on obviousness over prior art related to media programming and content delivery.
patent instituted · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01340
TikTok Inc.'s IPR against NTECH Properties, Inc. was instituted by the PTAB, meaning trial will proceed on all challenged claims. The Board adopted a plain and ordinary meaning for 'media stream' while rejecting Petitioner’s arguments regarding specific claim limitations related to output signals.
patent denied · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01339
TikTok's IPR challenge against NTECH Properties failed before the PTAB, with the Board denying all grounds of obviousness. The petitioner could not demonstrate that the cited prior art taught or suggested the limitations of the challenged claims in the video streaming patent.
patent denied · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01338
TikTok's IPR petition against NTECH Properties was denied by the PTAB, failing to establish a reasonable likelihood of success on obviousness grounds. The Board found that Petitioner could not adequately teach or suggest key limitations from the cited prior art (Marcus156 and Ferman).
patent instituted · Aug 23, 2024
Genius Sports v.SportsCastr Inc.
· IPR2024-01311
The PTAB institution decision granted IPR against claims 16-30 of the '218 patent, finding sufficient evidence to overcome initial defenses. The Board found that Petitioner successfully demonstrated a rationale for combining prior art references (Ellis and Spivey) to meet the institutional standard for obviousness.
patent instituted · Aug 23, 2024
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
· IPR2024-01310
The PTAB institution decision was granted, finding sufficient rationale for the Petitioner to combine teachings from prior art references (Ellis and Spivey) under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board specifically found that combining Ellis's content source with Spivey’s live data server devices would improve latency in real-time event delivery.
patent denied · Aug 23, 2024
UiPath, Inc. v.Rule 14 LLC
· IPR2024-01306
UiPath's IPR challenge against Rule 14 LLC was denied by the PTAB, as the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any challenged claims. The Board rejected the obviousness arguments because UiPath relied on conclusory assertions regarding motivation-to-combine rather than factual support.
patent final · Aug 23, 2024
Alamar Biosciences, Inc. v.Olink Proteomics AB et al.
· IPR2024-01353
The petitioner failed to prove the obviousness of claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 7883848 in a Final Written Decision. The Board adopted a specific claim construction for 'selecting all cis-reactive cells exhibiting the detectable trace,' defining it as selecting associations of at least two interactor moieties joined by an associated oligonucleotide that exhibit the detectable trace.
patent Final Written Decision · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01342
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding seven of the ten challenged claims unpatentable over prior art references. The Board relied heavily on obviousness (103) arguments, specifically using Whitehead as primary evidence for aggregation and content delivery systems.
patent Final Written Decision · Aug 23, 2024
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
· IPR2024-01340
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding most claims (1-12 and 14-18) unpatentable based on obviousness over prior art. Claims 13 and 19-24 were found patentable, despite significant dispute over claim construction terms like 'media stream.'
patent final · Aug 23, 2024
Genius Sports v.SportsCastr Inc.
· IPR2024-01311
The PTAB found that claims 16-30 of the patent are unpatentable based on anticipation and obviousness grounds. The Board concluded that prior art references, specifically Ellis and Spivey, teach or suggest all limitations of several challenged claims related to live event streaming and data synchronization.
patent Final Written Decision · Aug 23, 2024
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
· IPR2024-01310
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 15 challenged claims unpatentable as obvious over combinations of prior art. Petitioner successfully demonstrated that combining Ellis and Spivey taught an 'event socket' to improve latency, while other grounds were also met by the combination of Ellis, Spivey, and Herzog.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 22, 2024
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-01351
Dyson and Omachron settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,776,120, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before any merits were decided.
