US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 302 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent instituted · May 3, 2024
AT&T Corp et al. v.Daingean Technologies Ltd.
· IPR2024-00310
AT&T Mobility and others successfully petitioned to challenge Daingean Technologies' patent claims related to random access procedures. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on obviousness over prior art references Lee1 and Lee2 for claims 4, 5, 6, and 8.
patent Final Written Decision · May 3, 2024
AT&T Corp et al. v.Daingean Technologies Ltd.
· IPR2024-00310
The Board issued a Final Written Decision finding all challenged claims unpatentable. The patent relates to random access procedures in LTE/5G apparatuses and involved significant claim construction regarding power ramping functions.
patent null · May 2, 2024
DISH Network L.L.C. et al. v.Entropic Communications, LLC
· IPR2024-00546
DISH Network challenges the validity of patent 8621539, arguing that its claims are obvious by combining prior art from Hou, Konschak, and Dapper. The petitioner asserts that known techniques in broadband cable networking render the claimed methods predictable improvements.
patent instituted · May 2, 2024
TESLA, INC. v.iQar Inc.
· IPR2024-00541
Tesla challenged iQar Inc.'s patent (7,925,426) in an IPR proceeding, arguing that the claims related to route optimization and power management are obvious. The PTAB found merits compelling and decided to institute the case based on favorable Fintiv factors.
patent null · May 2, 2024
NJOY, LLC et al. v.JUUL Labs, Inc.
· IPR2024-00536
NJOY challenges JUUL's e-cigarette patent (US 11,606,981) on multiple grounds of obviousness (§ 103). The Petition argues that various combinations of prior art references render the claimed features of the vaping device readily apparent. This challenge is part of ongoing litigation and ITC investigations between the parties.
patent denied · May 2, 2024
DISH Network L.L.C. et al. v.Entropic Communications, LLC
· IPR2024-00546
The PTAB denied the institution of IPR for DISH Network against Entropic Communications, finding that the Petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any ground. The dispute centers on whether specific probe packet techniques in coaxial networks are obvious.
patent denied · May 2, 2024
TESLA, INC. v.iQar Inc.
· IPR2024-00541
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR challenging Tesla's patent 7,925,426 against iQar Inc., finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any challenged claim.
patent denied · May 2, 2024
NJOY, LLC et al. v.JUUL Labs, Inc.
· IPR2024-00536
The PTAB denied institution of the IPR petition for NJOY against JUUL Labs, finding that Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds. The Board found insufficient motivation or reasonable expectation of success in combining various prior art references across multiple claims.
patent terminated or settled · May 1, 2024
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. v.Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00356
Cadence Design Systems and Semiconductor Design Technologies settled their IPR dispute over patent 7,603,636, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding without a final written decision.
patent terminated or settled · May 1, 2024
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. v.Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00356
Cadence and Semiconductor Design Technologies have settled their dispute and jointly moved to terminate the IPR covering U.S. Patent 7,603,636, an electronic design automation patent.
patent terminated or settled · May 1, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Advanced Coding Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00327
Samsung and Advanced Coding Technologies have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,986,303 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review, invoking 35 U.S.C. §317.
patent denied · May 1, 2024
Ericsson Inc. et al. v.XR COMMUNICATIONS LLC
· IPR2024-00314
Ericsson filed a Director Review request after the PTAB denied instituting its IPR against XR Communications’ wireless patent. The petition argues the Board erred on claim construction and denied a hearing on a sua sponte construction, violating precedent.
patent · May 1, 2024
Ericsson Inc. et al. v.XR COMMUNICATIONS LLC
· IPR2024-00314
Ericsson and Nokia request Director review of a PTAB decision that denied institution of an IPR on their 5G‑related patent, arguing the Board added an unsupported ‘pre‑equalization’ step in claim construction. They seek vacatur of the denial and to proceed with the review.
patent denied · May 1, 2024
Ericsson Inc. et al. v.XR COMMUNICATIONS LLC
· IPR2024-00314
The USPTO denied Ericsson and Nokia's request for Director Review of the institution denial in IPR2024-00314, leaving the original denial of institution intact.
patent terminated or settled · May 1, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Advanced Coding Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00327
Samsung Electronics and Advanced Coding Technologies settled their IPR dispute, leading the PTAB to grant a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and treat the settlement as confidential. No merits were decided.
patent · May 1, 2024
Edwards Lifesciences Corp et al. v.Aortic Innovations LLC
· IPR2024-00390
Edwards Lifesciences filed a motion to dismiss an inter partes review of its aortic valve patent, arguing the case is pre‑institution and barred by a prior infringement lawsuit. The Board is asked to terminate the proceeding without a decision.
patent null · May 1, 2024
Edwards Lifesciences Corp et al. v.Aortic Innovations LLC
· IPR2024-00390
Edwards Lifesciences Corp challenges the validity of Aortic Innovations LLC's patent covering transcatheter heart valve implantation methods, arguing that the claims are obvious over various prior art combinations. The petitioner asserts that specific limitations added during prosecution do not provide sufficient inventive step and rely on established Board findings from previous IPR proceedings.
patent null · May 1, 2024
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. v.Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00356
Cadence Design Systems challenges the 7603636 patent, owned by Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC, on grounds of obviousness (103) and novelty (102). The petition argues that automatic generation of verification assertions from graphical specifications was predictable using combinations of prior art in IC design.
patent null · May 1, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Advanced Coding Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00327
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. filed a Petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 9,986,303 in the PTAB. The challenge asserts that the patent claims are obvious over prior art references Demircin and Kimoto under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Samsung also addresses discretionary denial provisions of the AIA.
patent null · May 1, 2024
Ericsson Inc. et al. v.XR COMMUNICATIONS LLC
· IPR2024-00314
Ericsson and other petitioners filed an opening petition challenging 7177369's validity on grounds of obviousness (103) and anticipation (102). The challenges focus heavily on the combination of prior art references (Wong, Minn, Lehne) to invalidate claims related to OFDM channel estimation and smart antenna technology.
patent instituted · May 1, 2024
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. v.Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00356
Cadence Design Systems, Inc. successfully instituted an IPR against Semiconductor Design Technologies, LLC regarding a semiconductor verification patent (7603636). The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability over multiple combinations of prior art references under 103.
patent instituted · May 1, 2024
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Advanced Coding Technologies, LLC
· IPR2024-00327
Samsung challenged two claims of Advanced Coding Technologies' video coding patent based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The PTAB found that the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing, leading to institution of the IPR.
patent denied · May 1, 2024
Ericsson Inc. et al. v.XR COMMUNICATIONS LLC
· IPR2024-00314
Ericsson and Nokia's IPR petition against XR Communications LLC was denied by the PTAB, failing to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success on obviousness grounds. The Board found that the petitioner did not persuasively show that prior art constituted 'pre-equalization.'
patent denied · Apr 30, 2024
Godbersen-Smith Construction Company d/b/a GOMACO Corporation v.Guntert & Zimmerman Const. Div., Inc.
· PGR2024-00026
The USPTO Director denied the petitions for Director Review of the Final Written Decision in PGR2024-00026, which challenges a construction‑equipment patent owned by Guntert & Zimmerman. The petitioner, GOMACO, had sought review but the request was rejected.
