US PTAB IP Litigation

Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al. v.MES, Inc.

· IPR2025-00422

The PTAB denied a patent owner's request for Director Review, finding that the Petitioners' real party in interest (RPI) status was not definitively proven. The cases are remanded to allow discovery on RPI and privity issues before determining if the petitions are time-barred.

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. v.Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd.

· IPR2025-00405

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. successfully petitioned to institute IPR proceedings against Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd.'s patent (11769910). The Board found sufficient evidence that the claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over various prior art references, including Zeng and Zhou. This ruling advances a critical battery technology dispute into trial.

Mercedes-Benz Group AG et al. v.Phelan Group, LLC

· IPR2025-00413

Mercedes-Benz Group AG successfully petitioned to challenge Phelan Group's patent (9045101) in the PTAB, leading to institution of all 20 claims. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing based on anticipation and obviousness grounds against multiple prior art references.

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. v.Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd.

· IPR2025-00405

The Director denied institution of IPR for Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. against Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd., citing the petition's unfocused nature and inefficient use of Office resources.

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. v.Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd.

· IPR2025-00389

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co. successfully petitioned the PTAB, leading to the institution of IPR proceedings against Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd.'s lithium-ion battery patent (11,923,498). The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success on obviousness grounds over multiple prior art references.

Ericsson Inc et al. v.HEADWATER PARTNERS II LLC

· IPR2025-00404

Ericsson Inc. successfully petitioned to invalidate key claims of Headwater Partners II LLC's patent related to wireless backhaul systems. The PTAB found a reasonable likelihood that the claims are unpatentable based on obviousness and anticipation over prior art (Ishii and Sfar).

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. v.Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd.

· IPR2025-00385

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd.'s IPR challenge against Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd. was denied by the PTAB. The Board found insufficient evidence to overcome anticipation and obviousness grounds related to lithium-ion battery separator materials.

Kubota North America Corporation et al. v.Vermeer Manufacturing Company

· IPR2025-00381

Kubota North America Corporation successfully petitioned the PTAB against Vermeer Manufacturing Company's patent, leading to institution on all 10 challenged claims. The Board adopted Petitioner's interpretation of 'loader support,' finding that prior art supports anticipation and obviousness grounds.

POSCO Co., Ltd. et al. v.ArcelorMittal

· IPR2025-00371

POSCO Co., Ltd. successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against ArcelorMittal's patent, demonstrating a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on all 25 challenged claims. The Board found sufficient evidence across multiple grounds of obviousness (103) involving various prior art combinations.

POSCO Co., Ltd. et al. v.ArcelorMittal

· IPR2025-00370

POSCO Co., Ltd. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute an IPR against ArcelorMittal's patent (10961602) regarding coated steel/aluminum alloys for automotive parts. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds, instituting the challenge across 30 claims.

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00369

The Director denied requests for review in multiple IPR proceedings involving Google and Samsung against Mullen Industries regarding patent 11246024. The denial affirms the initial decision not to institute trial.

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00368

The Director denied requests for review in multiple IPR proceedings involving Google and Mullen Industries. The decision affirms the prior denial of institution across several patent challenges.

Stingray Group Inc. et al. v.Hernandez-Mondragon, Edwin et al.

· IPR2025-00351

Stingray Group Inc. successfully secured institution of its IPR challenge against a patent covering multimedia content delivery systems. The Board found that Petitioner established a reasonable likelihood of prevailing across multiple grounds under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, moving the case to the merits phase.

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00367

The Director denied requests for review in multiple IPR proceedings involving Google and Mullen Industries. This decision affirms the prior denial of institution, meaning trial will not proceed on these patents.

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00366

The Director denied requests for review in multiple IPR proceedings involving Google and Mullen Industries regarding patent 11234117. This decision maintains the prior institution decisions across several related cases.

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00365

The Director denied requests for review in multiple IPR proceedings involving Google and Mullen Industries. The decision affirms the prior institution decisions across several patents.

Stingray Group Inc. et al. v.Hernandez-Mondragon, Edwin et al.

· IPR2025-00350

The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Stingray Group against Hernandez-Mondragon, focusing on multimedia streaming patents. The Board found the Petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on unpatentability grounds.

Stingray Group Inc. et al. v.Hernandez-Mondragon, Edwin et al.

· IPR2025-00349

The PTAB granted institution for the IPR against U.S. Patent 10,123,074, finding a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on Avellan. The decision confirmed that 'content provider' does not require originating the request.

Tesla, Inc. v.Intellectual Ventures II

· IPR2025-00343

Tesla successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Intellectual Ventures II LLC regarding wireless communication patents. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success that several claims are unpatentable over prior art references like Eckert and Bucknell.

KLIPSTA PTY LTD v.Albanese, Lindsay

· IPR2025-00346

The PTAB instituted IPR proceedings against U.S. Patent No. 10,413,047 for a hat holder system. The Board found that the petition demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on unpatentability grounds, including anticipation by KR ’458.

Tesla, Inc. v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC

· IPR2025-00342

The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Tesla against Intellectual Ventures II over a vehicle guidance patent. The Board rejected the Patent Owner's narrow claim constructions, finding that the Petitioner had shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds.

Tesla, Inc. v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC

· IPR2025-00341

The PTAB denied Tesla's IPR against Intellectual Ventures II over patent 7,181,743. The Board found that the prior art did not teach or suggest the specific 'event correlation capabilities' required by the challenged claims.

Tesla, Inc. v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC

· IPR2025-00340

Tesla challenged the validity of a target recognition patent (6894639) before the PTAB. The Board granted institution, finding that the Petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing in challenging at least one claim under § 103 over Barnard. This decision moves the case forward for substantive review on obviousness grounds.