US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 262 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent null
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
· IPR2024-00930
Samsung Electronics has filed a Petition challenging all 22 claims of Oura Health's '147 Patent, alleging obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The challenge relies on multiple combinations of prior art references, including Yuen, Schröder, and Mestas.
patent null
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
· IPR2024-00929
Samsung Electronics filed a petition challenging Oura Health Oy's U.S. Patent No. 10,893,833, asserting that all twelve claims are obvious over prior art references Yuen and Schröder. The petitioner grounds its challenge entirely on Section 103 (obviousness), arguing various combinations of the cited patents render the claims invalid. The petition also addresses discretionary denial issues under §314(a).
patent
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
· IPR2024-00928
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. has filed a petition challenging Oura Health Oy's patent for a wearable computing device, arguing that the invention is unpatentable over existing prior art. The petitioner asserts that combining references such as Schröder and Yuen renders the claimed finger ring obvious, covering both anticipation (102) and obviousness (103).
patent instituted
Sony Corporation v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC
· IPR2024-00925
Sony Corporation filed an IPR challenging the validity of Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC's '339 patent related to automated correction of imaging distortions. The petitioner argues that multiple combinations of prior art references render the claimed invention obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board found the petition demonstrated a strong showing on the merits, leading to institution.
patent instituted
Sony Corporation v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC
· IPR2024-00924
Sony Corporation filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging claims of the '805 patent held by Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC. The petitioner argues that the claimed automated image distortion correction is obvious when combining references like Watanabe, Takane, and Russ. This challenges the validity of key imaging technology patents in the digital image processing space.
patent null
Sony Corporation v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC
· IPR2024-00923
Sony Corporation challenges Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC's patent claims regarding automated imaging distortion correction under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner asserts that the claimed technology is obvious, relying on multiple combinations of prior art references in digital signal processing circuits.
patent null
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Video Solutions Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2024-00922
Cisco Systems filed an Initial Petition for Inter Partes Review challenging Video Solutions Pte. Ltd.'s patent (8446823) on grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petitioner argues that the claimed methods for managing traffic peaks and delay sensitivity in videoconferencing are predictable combinations of known prior art techniques. This challenge targets core data flow control mechanisms used in multi-party packet networks.
patent null
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00921
Amazon filed an IPR challenging Nokia Technologies Oy's patents related to hybrid video coding and prediction error encoding. The petition argues that the challenged claims are obvious over combinations of prior art references, specifically Koga, Lin, and Narroschke. Petitioners assert these combinations teach predictable improvements in codec implementation.
patent
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00920
Amazon challenged Nokia's hybrid video coding patents at the PTAB, arguing they are obvious combinations of known techniques found in Koga, Lin, and Narroschke. The petition focuses heavily on how combining transform and spatial domain methods is predictable within modern compression standards.
patent null
fuboTV Media Inc. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
· IPR2024-00919
Petitioners are challenging claims of DISH Technologies' '772 Patent based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The core argument centers on prior art, specifically Leaning, which allegedly discloses adaptive bitrate streaming technology. Petitioners also assert that institutional factors strongly favor the institution of the IPR.
patent null
fuboTV Media Inc. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
· IPR2024-00918
fuboTV Media Inc. has filed a Petition challenging DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s patent 9407564, asserting that all claimed limitations related to Adaptive Bitrate Streaming are obvious in view of prior art references Leaning and Gamble.
patent null
fuboTV Media Inc. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
· IPR2024-00917
Petitioners challenged 18 claims of DISH Technologies' adaptive bitrate streaming patent based on obviousness (§ 103), citing prior art references Leaning and Ala-Honkola. The PTAB found strong institutional factors, indicating the case will proceed to substantive review.
patent
Askeladden L.L.C. v.--
· IPR2024-00916
Askeladden L.L.C. filed an IPR petition challenging claims of Patent 7480637, arguing they are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner contends that combining known SSL/TLS protocols with biometric authentication methods yields predictable results.
The challenge centers on whether the combination of prior art elements—specifically Rescorla and Mathiassen's technologies—is inventive or merely an obvious modification for a Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art.
patent null
Askeladden L.L.C. v.--
· IPR2024-00915
Askeladden L.L.C. filed a Petition challenging Jabaa, L.L.C.'s patent claims related to biometric customer authentication apparatus. The core argument is that the challenged claims are obvious over combinations of prior art references like Mathiassen, Ryan, and Lim. The petitioner seeks to institute proceedings leading to the cancellation of all ten challenged claims.
patent null
Cholla Energy LLC et al. v.LANCIUM LLC
· IPR2024-00914
Petitioners challenged LANCIUM LLC's patent on renewable power integration in flexible datacenters, arguing that the claims are obvious over combinations of prior art like Pelio and Chapel. The core dispute centers on whether combining known concepts for dynamic power delivery renders the patented technology predictable.
patent null
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
· IPR2024-00913
Juniper Networks has filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging U.S. Patent No. 8,014,394 held by Portsmouth Network Corporation. The petitioner asserts that the patent claims related to multicast routing and stream management are obvious over existing prior art references. This challenge targets core network fabric technology.
patent
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00912
Micron Technology initiated an IPR petition against Yangtze Memory regarding claims related to charge-trap memories. The core argument is that the claimed memory device features are obvious when combining existing knowledge with specific prior art teachings.
patent null
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00911
Micron Technology has filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Yangtze Memory Technologies regarding its 3D NAND memory patents. The petition challenges claims based on obviousness over prior art reference Toyama et al., asserting that specific modifications are predictable to a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA).
patent null
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00910
Micron Technology filed a petition challenging claims 7-10 of Yangtze Memory Technologies' patent, asserting that the structural elements are obvious over prior art Park. The petitioner argues that the 'dummy source structure' disclosed in the prior art would be arranged predictably to support manufacturing processes.
patent null
Micron Technology, Inc. et al. v.Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00909
Micron Technology initiated an Inter Partes Review against Yangtze Memory Technologies regarding 3D NAND Flash Memory claims. The petitioner argues that the claimed structural elements are obvious over prior art reference Toyama, establishing a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits for IPR institution.
patent null
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00907
Samsung Electronics filed a Petition challenging Maxell's U.S. Patent No. 10,129,590 on grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioners argue that the claimed features related to multi-radio cellular phones and video processing are merely combinations of existing prior art.
patent null
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00906
Samsung Electronics challenged Maxell's patent covering multi-radio cellular functionality, simultaneous video/data transfer, and over-the-air updates. The petition argues these features were obvious combinations of prior art references like N93 and Dua. This IPR targets 27 claims across five distinct grounds.
patent
fuboTV Media Inc. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
· IPR2024-00905
fuboTV Media Inc. filed an Inter Partes Review against DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s '555 Patent, challenging 23 claims related to adaptive streaming technology. The petitioner argues that prior art references like Ogdon and SMIL 2.0 anticipate or render the claimed multi-bitrate streaming methods obvious under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103.
patent instituted
fuboTV Media Inc. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
· IPR2024-00904
fuboTV Media Inc. successfully petitioned to challenge DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s '680 Patent, arguing the multi-bitrate streaming claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The PTAB found strong arguments for institution based on established frameworks. This move initiates a critical examination of the patent's validity in the media streaming space.
