US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 295 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent instituted
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited et al. v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.
· IPR2025-00847
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited and Apple Inc. successfully challenged Marlin Semiconductor Ltd.'s patent claims, leading to an institution decision where the Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on all 11 claims. The grounds for unpatentability centered on anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102) and obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103), utilizing multiple prior art references including Lan, Wang407, and Chen.
patent denied
Apple Inc. v.Allani, Ferid
· IPR2025-00856
The PTAB denied Apple's IPR against Ferid Allani's patent, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any challenged claim.
patent instituted
Suzhou Mojawa Intelligent Electronic Co., Ltd. v.Shenzhen Shokz Co., Ltd.
· IPR2025-00843
The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of success for the petitioner in challenging numerous claims of bone conduction headphone technology based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board adopted the petitioner's definition of the level of ordinary skill, finding sufficient grounds to proceed with the IPR against Shenzhen Shokz Co., Ltd.
patent instituted
Suzhou Mojawa Intelligent Electronic Co., Ltd. v.Shenzhen Shokz Co., Ltd.
· IPR2025-00842
The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for multiple claims in the audio device patent (11197084). The Petitioner successfully argued that combining prior art references, particularly Li and Fujita, renders the claimed earphone structure obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
patent instituted
MIM Software Inc. et al. v.EXINI Diagnostics AB, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-00827
MIM Software Inc. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against EXINI Diagnostics AB, Inc.'s patent (11941817) on grounds of anticipation and obviousness. The Board found reasonable likelihood that the claims are unpatentable based on prior art references like Renisch and Zhao.
patent denied
Docker Inc. v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC
· IPR2025-00840
The USPTO Board denied the institution of IPR2025-00840, favoring Intellectual Ventures II LLC's request for discretionary denial. The decision cited parallel district court and IPR proceedings as reasons to conserve resources.
patent instituted
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00821
ClearCorrect Operating successfully convinced the PTAB to institute review on all claims, arguing that Align Technology's dental aligner patents are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103. The Board accepted the petitioner's arguments regarding material substitutions (Tritan for polycarbonate) and combining prior art references into a multilayer device.
patent instituted
Google LLC v.Sandpiper CDN, LLC
· IPR2025-00826
Google LLC successfully had its IPR institution decision upheld, advancing the case against Sandpiper CDN, LLC's patent 9021112. The Board found that Petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.
patent instituted
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00819
ClearCorrect Operating successfully instituted the IPR against Align Technology's dental appliance patent by demonstrating a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds. The Board found sufficient motivation in prior art references to combine them and support the claims under Section 103.
patent instituted
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00820
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for ClearCorrect against Align Technology regarding a dental aligner patent (11,648,090). The Board found sufficient evidence that the challenged claims would be obvious over prior art references.
patent instituted
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00818
The PTAB decided to institute the IPR proceedings against Align Technology's patent (10973613) after Petitioner ClearCorrect demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. The Board found that combining prior art references like Tadros, Kalili, and Texin 990R was motivated by POSITA with reasonable expectation of success.
patent instituted
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00817
ClearCorrect Operating successfully moved its IPR against Align Technology's dental scanning patent to the trial phase. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim, leading to institution on all 20 claims.
patent instituted
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00816
ClearCorrect Operating challenged Align Technology's dental treatment planning patent (11,369,456 B2) before the PTAB. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on Ground 1, based on obviousness over Chishti-511, Chishti-876, and Sachdeva.
patent denied
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00815
ClearCorrect Operating lost its IPR challenge against Align Technology's '879 patent in a PTAB decision focused on obviousness. The Board rejected the petitioner’s argument that combining prior art references would render the claims obvious, upholding the validity of the challenged technology in orthodontics.
patent denied
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al. v.Align Technology, Inc.
· IPR2025-00814
ClearCorrect Operating lost its IPR challenge against Align Technology regarding dental treatment planning technology. The PTAB ruled that the claimed obviousness over prior art was not demonstrated, upholding the validity of the patent claims.
patent instituted
United Services Automobile Association v.Auto Telematics Ltd.
· IPR2025-00812
USAA successfully petitioned to institute IPR proceedings against Auto Telematics Ltd.'s patent covering driver behavior monitoring and accident detection technology. The Board found the claims were reasonably likely to be obvious over combinations of prior art references, moving the case toward trial.
patent instituted
Google LLC v.Sandpiper CDN, LLC
· IPR2025-00806
Google LLC successfully petitioned to institute an IPR against Sandpiper CDN, LLC regarding patent 8645517. The Board found sufficient evidence of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on combinations of prior art references. This moves the dispute into a trial phase at the PTAB.
patent instituted
Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
· IPR2025-00805
The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for the multi-fuel generator patent (10393034). The Board adopted Petitioner's claim construction regarding 'gaseous fuel,' which was critical to establishing obviousness and anticipation grounds.
patent denied
Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
· IPR2025-00805
The PTAB Director denied institution of IPRs against Champion Power Equipment because Generac Power Systems presented inconsistent claim construction arguments in related litigation versus before the Board. This decision reinforces precedents requiring petitioners to maintain a single, consistent interpretation of patent claims.
patent denied
American Airlines, Inc. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC
· IPR2025-00786
American Airlines and Southwest Airlines failed to invalidate Intellectual Ventures I LLC's patent covering virtual community networks and IP routing. The PTAB denied the petition, finding that the petitioner could not persuasively demonstrate obviousness over prior art references like Caronni-I and RFC-1383.
patent instituted
Intas Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v.Atossa Therapeutics, Inc.
· IPR2025-00799
Intas Pharmaceuticals successfully secured the institution of IPR against Atossa Therapeutics over a drug polymorph patent (11,261,151), challenging claims based on anticipation and obviousness using prior art Liu.
patent denied
American Airlines, Inc. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC
· IPR2025-00785
The PTAB denied institution for American Airlines and Southwest Airlines against Intellectual Ventures I LLC, finding the petitioner failed to meet the 'reasonable likelihood' standard under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). The Board specifically rejected the obviousness arguments concerning partitioning and descriptions limitations based on prior art references Chow, Reiffin, and Kurowski.
patent denied
American Airlines, Inc. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC
· IPR2025-00782
American Airlines and Southwest Airlines failed to convince the PTAB that their challenged claims were unpatentable. The Board denied institution because the Petitioners could not provide sufficient rational underpinning against prior art references like Bruner and Clark, particularly regarding technical limitations.
patent instituted
Valneva Austria GMBH v.Takeda Vaccines, Inc.
· IPR2025-00776
Valneva Austria GMBH successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Takeda Vaccines regarding a vaccine patent. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that several claims are unpatentable over combinations of prior art, specifically citing evidence related to fetal protection and antibody transfer.
