US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 247 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Aug 4, 2024
Hulu LLC et al. v.--
· IPR2024-00787
Hulu and Capital One filed an unopposed motion to terminate IPR2024‑00787 and to keep the settlement agreement with Implicit, LLC confidential under statutory provisions.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 4, 2024
Hulu LLC et al. v.--
· IPR2024-00787
Hulu and Capital One settled their IPR dispute with patent owner Implicit, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before trial. The Board granted motions to keep the settlement agreements confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00604
Amazon and Nokia filed a joint motion to terminate IPR2024‑00604 and submitted a settlement agreement. The Board granted the termination and partially granted confidentiality of the settlement documents.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00604
Amazon and Nokia settled their dispute over a video‑device patent and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review, ending the proceeding.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00605
Amazon and Nokia jointly filed a settlement and motion to terminate IPR2024-00605 covering Nokia’s patent 10,536,714. The Board granted termination and partially approved confidentiality of the settlement documents.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00605
Amazon and Nokia have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 10,536,714 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding, requesting the settlement documents be kept confidential.
patent · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00604
Amazon and Nokia have settled their IPR dispute over Patent 10,536,714 and jointly seek to keep the settlement agreement confidential while terminating the proceeding.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00605
Amazon and Nokia have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,536,714 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites statutory authority and public‑policy reasons to end the proceeding.
patent instituted · Aug 4, 2024
Hulu LLC et al. v.--
· IPR2024-00787
Hulu LLC and Capital One filed an IPR petition challenging 13 claims of Patent No. 6976248, arguing they are obvious over various combinations of prior art references (Johnson, Parthasarathy, Fowlow). The petitioner asserts that the claimed software delivery methods lack inventive step under 35 U.S.C. §103(a).
patent null · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00605
Amazon challenges Nokia's HEVC patent (US 10,536,714) on grounds of obviousness (103) and novelty (102). The petitioner argues that prior art references like Rusert, Karczewicz, Nakamura, and WD4 teach the claimed methods for reducing redundant motion vector candidates in video coding.
patent null · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00604
Amazon challenges Nokia's video coding patent (10536714) on grounds of obviousness (103). The petitioner argues that the claimed method for improving motion vector prediction was already known through prior art references like Rusert, Karczewicz, and Nakamura. This is an opening petition challenging a core technology in video compression standards.
patent instituted · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00605
Amazon successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Nokia's video encoding patent, showing a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple claims. The Board adopted a specific claim construction for 'the block,' narrowing its scope to be associated with the first spatial motion vector prediction candidate.
patent instituted · Aug 4, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00604
Amazon successfully challenged 17 claims of Nokia's video compression patent via IPR, arguing obviousness over prior art. The Board found that the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds, particularly concerning the combination of Rusert and Karczewicz techniques.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 3, 2024
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00670
Dyson and Omachron settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,607,407 B2. The parties jointly moved to terminate the IPR, and the Board granted the motion, ending the proceeding.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 3, 2024
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00670
Dyson and Omachron settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 8,607,407 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding, requesting the settlement be kept confidential.
patent · Aug 3, 2024
Aptiv Services US, LLC et al. v.Microchip Technology, Inc.
· IPR2024-00646
Microchip Technology seeks Director Review of a PTAB decision that found all claims of its low‑quiescent‑current voltage regulator patent obvious. The patent owner contends the Board erred on motivation, KSR application, and teaching‑away analysis. Aptiv Services, the petitioner, argues the combination is obvious over the cited references.
patent · Aug 3, 2024
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.InfoExpress Inc.
· IPR2024-00540
Cisco and Fortinet have filed a Director Review petition to overturn the PTAB’s denial of institution for their IPR against InfoExpress’s network‑security patent. They contend the Board misinterpreted claim language on user authentication and ignored supporting evidence from the Krantz reference.
patent · Aug 3, 2024
Aptiv Services US, LLC et al. v.Microchip Technology, Inc.
· IPR2024-00646
The PTAB emailed counsel confirming receipt of the Patent Owner’s Director Review request in IPR2024‑00646. The petitioner is limited to a 15‑page response addressing only the issues raised, with no new evidence allowed.
patent · Aug 3, 2024
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00670
Court decision.
patent denied · Aug 3, 2024
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.InfoExpress Inc.
· IPR2024-00540
The USPTO denied Cisco and Fortinet's request for Director review of a prior institution denial in IPR2024-00540, leaving the original decision unchanged.
patent null · Aug 3, 2024
Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00670
Dyson Technology Limited filed a Petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 8,607,407 related to cleaning appliances. The challenger asserts that the patent is unpatentable under both §102 (anticipation) and §103 (obviousness).
patent null · Aug 3, 2024
FERVO ENERGY CO. v.Ormat Technologies, Inc.
· IPR2024-00665
FERVO ENERGY CO. challenges Ormat Technologies' patent (7320221) in a PTAB petition, asserting obviousness over multiple combinations of geothermal and hydrocarbon prior art. The petitioner argues that the challenged claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on references including Rinaldi, Mims, and Swenson.
patent null · Aug 3, 2024
Aptiv Services US, LLC et al. v.Microchip Technology, Inc.
· IPR2024-00646
Aptiv Services challenged Microchip Technology's LDO voltage regulator patent (9471074), arguing that the claimed features are obvious over prior art. The petitioner relies heavily on combinations of references like Al-Shyoukh, Rincon-Mora, Ivanov, and Stanescu to demonstrate lack of inventive step.
patent null · Aug 3, 2024
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.InfoExpress Inc.
· IPR2024-00540
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. filed an IPR petition challenging claims of InfoExpress Inc.'s patent (8,347,350), arguing they are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The challenge relies on combining prior art references Krantz and Herrmann to demonstrate predictable network access control features.
