US PTAB IP Litigation

The PTAB held that all 14 challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’307 patent are unpatentable. Rode Microphones successfully proved obviousness and anticipation over multiple prior‑art references. The Board also granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend with substitute claims 15‑28.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

RØDE Microphones challenges the PTAB’s finding of privity with its subsidiary Lectrosonics, seeking to vacate the institution of an IPR against Zaxcom’s 7,929,902 patent. The petition argues the Board misapplied the Taylor exceptions and violated due‑process rights.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent denied · Apr 12, 2024

Rode Microphones has filed a Director Review petition asking the PTAB to vacate the institution of an IPR against Zaxcom’s microphone patent, arguing the Board erred in finding privity with its newly‑acquired subsidiary Lectrosonics. The petition contends that parent‑subsidiary relationships do not satisfy the Taylor exceptions used to bar the challenge.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

The USPTO denied Rode Microphones' request for director review of the institution decisions in three IPRs, including the case involving patent 10,276,207. The institution decisions therefore remain in force.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent denied · Apr 12, 2024

Zaxcom submitted a corrected response in IPR2025‑00231, fixing a misquoted exhibit reference and asking the Board to remove the earlier filing. No substantive changes were made to the arguments.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

RØDE microphones’ request for Director review of the termination of IPR 2025‑00231 was denied. The Board affirmed that Lectrosonics is a privy of RØDE, satisfying the §315(b) time‑bar and correctly applying Taylor exceptions.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

Rode Microphones and Freedman Electronics seek Director Review of the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against Zaxcom’s 7,929,902 patent. They argue the Board ignored Guidance, settled expectations, and failed to rule on a motion to terminate, warranting denial of institution.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Apr 12, 2024

Zaxcom seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s institution decision for its 2019 microphone patent, arguing the Board misapplied discretionary considerations and ignored Guidance. The request targets claims 17‑19, 21‑23, 33‑34, 59‑60, and 66.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

The PTAB held that all 14 challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’307 patent are unpatentable, finding anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to replace the cancelled claims with narrower substitute claims.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Apr 12, 2024

RØDE Microphones files a Director Review petition challenging the PTAB’s finding of privity with its newly‑acquired subsidiary Lectrosonics, arguing the Board misapplied the Taylor exceptions and violated due‑process. The petition seeks vacatur of the institution and dismissal of the IPR against Zaxcom’s ’902 patent.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

The PTAB found all of Rode Microphones’ challenged claims of Zaxcom’s 8,385,814 patent unpatentable as obvious over a combination of prior‑art references, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend with new claims 50‑65.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

Zaxcom seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against its 2010 microphone patent. The Patent Owner argues the Board misapplied discretionary considerations and Fintiv factors, ignoring settled expectations and the Director’s Guidance.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

Rode Microphones filed an IPR petition challenging Zaxcom’s 9,336,307 patent. The petitioner contends that all 14 claims are obvious or anticipated over multiple prior‑art references and seeks cancellation of the entire patent.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

RØDE Microphones and Freedman Electronics filed a corrected request for Director Review to fix a citation error and seek dismissal of an IPR against Zaxcom’s patent. No substantive changes were made to the original arguments.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

RØDE Microphones and Freedman Electronics argue the PTAB correctly instituted an IPR against Zaxcom and that the Board’s discretion was not abused, urging denial of the Patent Owner’s Director Review request.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

Zaxcom has requested Director Review of three IPRs, including IPR2025-00231. The petitioner, Rode Microphones, is limited to a brief response on the raised issues and may not submit new evidence.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Apr 12, 2024

Rode Microphones filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 14 claims of Zaxcom’s 9,336,307 patent, arguing that prior‑art systems render the claims anticipated or obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Apr 12, 2024

The PTAB found all 16 challenged claims of Zaxcom’s 8,385,814 patent unpatentable as obvious over a combination of prior‑art references, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to replace those claims with new claims 50‑65.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Apr 12, 2024

The PTAB held that claims 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15 of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent are unpatentable and granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend, replacing them with claims 21‑26.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Apr 12, 2024

Rode Microphones successfully invalidated Zaxcom’s 9,336,307 patent. The PTAB found all 14 challenged claims unpatentable under §§102 and 103, adopting broad claim constructions and rejecting Zaxcom’s arguments. Substitute claims 15‑28 were approved.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Apr 12, 2024

The PTAB held that all six challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent are unpatentable for obviousness or anticipation, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend with substitute claims 21‑26. The Board’s claim constructions favored the petitioner’s broader interpretations.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

The PTAB held that all six challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent are unpatentable, finding them obvious or anticipated over prior art such as Strub, Nagai, Gleissner, Woo, and Wood, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend with narrower substitute claims.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.