US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 319 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent denied
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01271
Google LLC's request for rehearing regarding the institution of IPR against Metarail's patent was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that Google failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that the prior art disclosed the claimed mapping limitations.
patent denied
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01271
Google LLC's IPR challenge against Metarail, Inc.'s deep-linking and ad targeting patent was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that prior art (Belanger and Halevy) did not teach or suggest the specific method of mapping fields between different websites using normalized variables.
patent denied
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01270
Google LLC's IPR challenge against Metarail, Inc.'s deep linking technology was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that Google failed to demonstrate obviousness over combinations of prior art references like Belanger and Halevy.
patent denied
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01270
Google LLC's request for rehearing was denied after the PTAB initially denied institution of IPR against Metarail, Inc.'s patent 9633378, concerning data mapping technologies.
patent denied
Google LLC v.Metarail, Inc.
· IPR2024-01269
Google LLC's attempt to invalidate Metarail, Inc.'s patent on deep-linking and e-commerce technology was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that Google failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability under obviousness grounds (35 U.S.C. § 103).
patent instituted
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company et al.
· IPR2024-01267
Samsung Electronics challenged Cerence Operating Company’s patentability over handwriting recognition and text input features, arguing obviousness using prior art from Arai and Fenwick. The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple claims, advancing the IPR challenge.
patent denied
2985 LLC d/b/a Mountain Voyage Company, LLC v.The Ridge Wallet LLC
· IPR2024-01264
Mountain Voyage's IPR petition against The Ridge Wallet was denied by the PTAB because it was filed more than one year after receiving a district court infringement complaint, rendering the attempt to join related proceedings moot.
patent instituted
Penumbra, Inc. v.RapidPulse, Inc.
· IPR2024-01261
Penumbra successfully petitioned to institute IPR against RapidPulse regarding claims related to aspiration thrombectomy systems. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of obviousness across multiple grounds, including combinations involving Yang and Mullins.
patent instituted
LEDUP MANUFACTURING GROUP LTD. v.Seasonal Specialties, LLC
· IPR2024-01259
The PTAB institution decision found sufficient evidence that the challenged claims are unpatentable, proceeding on grounds of anticipation (102) and obviousness (103). The case involves resistor bypass circuits for LED lighting, with the Petitioner arguing various prior art combinations teach the claimed invention.
patent instituted
LEDUP MANUFACTURING GROUP LTD. v.Seasonal Specialties, LLC
· IPR2024-01258
The PTAB institution decision found sufficient grounds for LEDUP MANUFACTURING GROUP LTD.'s challenge against Seasonal Specialties, LLC's patent (US 11096252). The Board established reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior art references. This moves the case toward a full trial at PTAB.
patent denied
Imperative Care, Inc. v.Inari Medical, Inc.
· IPR2024-01257
The PTAB denied the institution of an IPR challenge against Inari Medical's patent (11744691) covering emboli treatment systems. The Board found that the petitioner, Imperative Care, Inc., failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on its grounds of anticipation and obviousness.
patent denied
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01253
The PTAB granted Director Review and denied institution of IPR for Hulu against Piranha Media. The denial was based on a prior district court finding that the challenged patent claims were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
patent instituted
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01253
Hulu successfully petitioned against Piranha Media Distribution's patent, arguing that key digital advertising insertion claims are obvious over prior art. The PTAB granted institution, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the merits for at least one claim.
patent instituted
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01252
Hulu successfully petitioned PTAB, leading to institution of its IPR against Piranha Media Distribution. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that claims are unpatentable based on obviousness (103), specifically finding that combining prior art teachings from Wu and Doherty supports the Petitioner's claims in digital advertising insertion.
patent denied
Hulu, LLC et al. v.Piranha Media Distribution, LLC
· IPR2024-01252
The PTAB denied institution of IPR for Hulu against Piranha, citing a prior district court ruling that the patent claims were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
patent denied
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Collision Communications, Inc.
· IPR2024-01248
The PTAB denied the IPR petition filed by Samsung against Collision Communications' patent covering Multiuser Detection (MUD) technology. The Board found the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the prior art adequately taught the claimed unique signal parameters, leading to a lack of particularity in the arguments.
patent denied
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Collision Communications, Inc.
· IPR2024-01250
Samsung Electronics' IPR petition against Collision Communications was denied by the PTAB, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success. The Board specifically cited deficiencies in how Samsung addressed critical limitations within the challenged claims using the prior art.
patent denied
TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC
· IPR2024-01245
TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. failed to overcome obviousness challenges in an IPR before the PTAB, resulting in the denial of its petition. The Board found that Petitioner did not present a compelling or meritorious challenge despite analyzing multiple grounds against various prior art references.
patent denied
TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC
· IPR2024-01244
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR challenging claims related to Cyclic Diversity Systems (OFDM), finding the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. The Board specifically found deficiencies in meeting the duration requirements when comparing cyclic advance against prior art disclosures like Larsson and IEEE.
patent instituted
Silicon Motion Inc. et al. v.K. Mizra LLC
· IPR2024-01241
Silicon Motion Inc.'s petition against K. Mizra LLC was instituted by the PTAB on grounds of obviousness (§ 103). The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success regarding multiple claims related to DRAM interface circuitry, proceeding toward a full trial.
patent instituted
Silicon Motion Inc. et al. v.K. Mizra LLC
· IPR2024-01240
Silicon Motion Inc. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute an IPR against K. Mizra LLC's patent, arguing that the technology for high-speed digital communication channel calibration was obvious over various prior art references. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds of obviousness (103).
patent instituted
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
· IPR2024-01239
Arista Networks successfully secured the institution of Inter Partes Review against Orckit Corporation's patent (10652111). The Board found a reasonable likelihood that Arista could prove obviousness based on prior art related to Software Defined Networking and Deep Packet Inspection.
patent denied
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
· IPR2024-01238
Arista Networks lost its IPR challenge against Orckit Corporation's '821 Patent, with the PTAB finding no reasonable likelihood that claims 14, 15, and 16 were unpatentable. The Board rejected Petitioner's arguments that prior art combined references taught or suggested the claimed network protection methods.
patent instituted
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
· IPR2024-01238
The DRP granted Director Review and vacated the Board's denial of institution for Arista Networks against Orckit Corporation. The decision corrected the claim construction and found a reasonable likelihood that Ashwood Smith teaches key limitations.
