US PTAB IP Litigation

Hanwha Solutions Corporation v.Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.

· IPR2024-01203

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.

Hanwha Solutions Corporation v.Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.

· IPR2024-01199

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. et al.

· IPR2024-01198

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.

DR. FALK PHARMA GMBH v.Ellodi Pharmaceuticals LP

· IPR2024-01197

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.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Croga Innovations Ltd.

· IPR2024-01196

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.

Canadian Solar Inc. et al. v.Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.

· IPR2024-01194

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.

Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.THROUGH TEK TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) CO., LTD. et al.

· IPR2024-01193

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).

Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.THROUGH TEK TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) CO., LTD. et al.

· IPR2024-01192

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.

Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.

· IPR2024-01191

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.

Wiz, Inc. v.Orca Security Ltd.

· IPR2024-01190

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.

Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al. v.Pictiva Displays International Ltd. et al.

· IPR2024-01187

Samsung Display Co., Ltd. filed an IPR petition challenging Pictiva Displays International Ltd.'s patent on passive electronic components and OLED displays. The petitioner asserts that the challenged claims are obvious based on various combinations of prior art, including Ingle, Hasei, Hanamura, and Egitto.

Arashi Vision Inc. (d/b/a Insta360) v.GoPro, Inc.

· IPR2024-01186

Arashi Vision Inc. challenges GoPro's patent on grounds of obviousness, arguing that existing prior art references render the stabilization claims predictable. Petitioner asserts that combining techniques from Zhou, Kwatra, and Shi provides a reasonable expectation of success for improving video stabilization accuracy. This challenge targets 20 claims related to imaging and video processing.

Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC

· IPR2024-01181

Lenovo and others have filed a Petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 10,749,700 on grounds of obviousness (§ 103). The petitioners argue that the claimed network scheduling and application prioritization features are merely predictable combinations of existing prior art references like Rao and Scahill.

Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC

· IPR2024-01180

Lenovo and Motorola challenged U.S. Patent No. 9,198,076, arguing that its claims related to power management and network prioritization are obvious. The petitioners assert that combining prior art references like Rao and Araujo with others provides predictable improvements in device functionality and battery longevity.

Solaris Oilfield Site Services Operating, LLC et al. v.Masaba, Inc.

· IPR2024-01179

Petitioners successfully achieved institution in this IPR challenging Masaba, Inc.'s aggregate transfer apparatus patent (11780689). The petition asserts that the claimed system is obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103 based on predictable combinations of various prior art references.

Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v.California Institute of Technology et al.

· IPR2024-01178

Bio-Rad Laboratories has filed an IPR challenging the validity of a patent covering multiplex digital PCR assays owned by California Institute of Technology et al. The petitioner argues that the claimed methods are unpatentably obvious, representing only a straightforward extension of existing nucleic acid analysis concepts.

Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v.California Institute of Technology et al.

· IPR2024-01177

Bio-Rad Laboratories filed a Petition challenging the obviousness of nine claims in patent 10068051, which relates to molecular diagnostics/PCR methods. The petitioner argues that the claimed multiplexed detection techniques are straightforward extensions of existing prior art concepts found in references like Saxonov and Silverbrook.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

· IPR2024-01176

Amazon filed an IPR challenging Nokia’s patent (8175148) based on obviousness over foundational video compression standards like MPEG-1 and H.263. The petitioner argues that key claimed features, including motion compensated prediction and dynamic quantization levels, are already disclosed in these established industry standards.

AMAZON.COM, INC. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

· IPR2024-01175

Petitioner Amazon challenges 40 claims of Nokia's '701 patent in an IPR petition. The central argument is that combinations of prior art, specifically run/level coding techniques (Tsai) and context-switching methods (VCEG-L28), render the claimed image compression technology obvious.

Dr. Squatch, LLC v.The Procter & Gamble Company

· IPR2024-01174

Dr. Squatch challenged The Procter & Gamble Company’s '706 Patent, arguing that its claims regarding natural deodorants are unpatentable. The petitioner relies on multiple grounds of anticipation and obviousness (35 U.S.C. §§ 102/103). These challenges focus on the use of basic concepts and ingredient combinations found in existing prior art.

Dr. Squatch, LLC v.The Procter & Gamble Company

· IPR2024-01173

Dr. Squatch, LLC has filed a petition challenging The Procter & Gamble Company's deodorant patent (10905647) on grounds of anticipation and obviousness. The petitioner argues that the claimed stick compositions merely recite known ingredients and consumer preferences within the cosmetics industry.

Kia Corporation et al. v.Emerging Automotive LLC

· IPR2024-01167

Petitioners Kia and Toyota filed a petition challenging Emerging Automotive LLC's patent on vehicle access control systems using electronic keys. The challenge centers on multiple grounds of obviousness and anticipation, citing prior art from Kleve, Hatton, Mikan, Xiao, and Sekiyama.

Arashi Vision Inc. (d/b/a Insta360) v.GoPro, Inc.

· IPR2024-01165

Arashi Vision Inc. (Insta360) has challenged GoPro's video stabilization patent via an IPR petition, arguing that the claims are obvious.