US PTAB IP Litigation

patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld · Mar 25, 2024

Kohler Co. successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against Delta Faucet Company et al., challenging claims related to illuminated showerheads. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on key grounds, advancing the dispute to trial.

Kohler Co. v.Delta Faucet Company et al.

patent final · Mar 25, 2024

Director granted review, vacating parts of the Final Written Decision in a Kohler vs. Delta Faucet IPR, remanding claims 10 and 19 for further analysis.

Kohler Co. v.Delta Faucet Company et al.

patent final · Mar 25, 2024

The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that all 24 claims of the patent were unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. The Board adopted a broad construction for key terms like 'outer illumination surface' and 'translucent light pipe,' supporting the finding of obviousness across multiple grounds.

Kohler Co. v.Delta Faucet Company et al.

The Board found that claims 1, 2, and 9 were unpatentable over prior art references Tseng and Mizuno based on obviousness. The remaining claims (3-8 and 10-24) were deemed patentable.

patent · Mar 23, 2024

Nearmap US, Inc. v.Eagle View Technologies, Inc. et al.

patent denied · Mar 23, 2024

Nearmap requests Director review of the PTAB’s denial to institute its IPR against Eagle View’s geo‑temporal property‑database patent. The petitioner claims the Board misapplied procedural rules, penalized its claim‑chart format and expert declaration length, and ignored substantive prior‑art mappings.

Nearmap US, Inc. v.Eagle View Technologies, Inc. et al.

patent null · Mar 23, 2024

The PTAB denied Nearmap's request for Director Review of the earlier institution denial in the IPR against Eagle View's patent.

Nearmap US, Inc. v.Eagle View Technologies, Inc. et al.

patent denied · Mar 23, 2024

Nearmap US, Inc. filed an IPR petition challenging the validity of Eagle View Technologies' patent 10671648. The petitioner asserts that the claims are anticipated or rendered obvious by prior art references including Harris and Florance. This challenge focuses on geo-temporal database indexing and querying methods.

Nearmap US, Inc. v.Eagle View Technologies, Inc. et al.

patent terminated or settled · Mar 22, 2024

The PTAB denied institution of IPR for Nearmap US against Eagle View Technologies regarding a property database patent (10671648). The denial was based on the Petitioner's failure to provide a detailed, non-bare-quotation explanation linking prior art disclosures to the challenged claims.

AT&T Corp. et al. v.Soto, Alexander et al.

· IPR2024-00712

AT&T and the Soto patent owners have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,238,754 covering passive optical network technology. They jointly filed a motion to terminate the IPR, requesting the Board treat the settlement agreement as confidential.

patent denied · Mar 22, 2024

MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.

· IPR2024-00720

The PTAB denied MediaTek’s request for rehearing of its earlier decision denying institution of an IPR against MOSAID’s power‑island patent. The Board found the petitioner’s arguments about plural sleep transistors and POSITA knowledge unsubstantiated.

patent denied · Mar 22, 2024

MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.

· IPR2024-00721

The PTAB denied MediaTek’s request for rehearing of its earlier decision denying institution of an IPR against MOSAID’s 9,350,349 patent covering power islands with plural sleep transistors. The Board found MediaTek’s arguments insufficient and no abuse of discretion.

patent · Mar 22, 2024

Loco Crazy Good Cookers, Inc. v.North Atlantic Imports, LLC

· IPR2024-00642

Loco Crazy Good Cookers and North Atlantic Imports have settled their dispute over a cooking‑appliance patent and jointly moved to dismiss the inter partes review.

patent terminated or settled · Mar 22, 2024

Loco Crazy Good Cookers, Inc. v.North Atlantic Imports, LLC

· IPR2024-00642

The IPR concerning U.S. Patent 10,660,473 was terminated after the petitioner and patent owner reached a settlement and jointly moved to dismiss the proceeding.

patent · Mar 22, 2024

Nichia Corporation v.BX LED LLC

· IPR2024-00544

Nichia and LED maker BX LED have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 7,973,465 and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR. The motion cites lack of institution and no merits decided, requesting Board approval of termination.

patent terminated or settled · Mar 22, 2024

Nichia Corporation v.BX LED LLC

· IPR2024-00544

Nichia and BX LED settled their LED patent dispute, filing a joint motion that led the PTAB to terminate the IPR before any trial. The settlement agreement was ordered to be kept confidential.

VIZIO, Inc. v.Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.

· IPR2024-00723

VIZIO, Inc. challenged claims of Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.'s patent (9578384) in an IPR proceeding based on obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner argued that the claimed VOD navigation structure was predictable by combining elements from prior art references like Kim, Hunt, and TechnoBuffalo.

patent instituted · Mar 22, 2024

VIZIO, Inc. v.Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.

· IPR2024-00722

VIZIO, Inc. challenged the patentability of Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.'s claims regarding adaptive display systems in intelligent televisions. The petitioner argues that these GUI elements are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over prior art references Lider and Eibl.

MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.

· IPR2024-00721

MediaTek Inc. successfully petitioned PTAB to institute an IPR against MOSAID Technologies Inc.'s patent, challenging claims related to power management in integrated circuits. The petition asserts that the challenged claims are obvious over various prior art references under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

patent instituted · Mar 22, 2024

MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.

· IPR2024-00720

MediaTek Inc. challenges MOSAID Technologies Inc.'s '438 Patent, asserting that the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petition relies on combining multiple prior art references (Takahashi, Mizuno, Notani) to demonstrate predictability in leakage reduction circuitry.

Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation

· IPR2024-00714

Valve Corporation challenged Immersion Corporation's '907 patent, arguing that the claims are anticipated or obvious over multiple prior art references including Goldenberg and Levin. The petitioner asserted compelling evidence of unpatentability across all 20 claims based on various grounds of anticipation and obviousness.

patent instituted · Mar 22, 2024

AT&T Corp. et al. v.Soto, Alexander et al.

· IPR2024-00712

AT&T Corp. et al. successfully petitioned to institute an IPR against the '754 Patent, challenging 30 claims based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. §103). The Board found strong merits in the petition, noting that the combination of prior art references was highly relevant to Passive Optical Networks (PONs).

Loco Crazy Good Cookers, Inc. v.North Atlantic Imports, LLC

· IPR2024-00642

Loco Crazy Good Cookers challenges the validity of North Atlantic Imports' griddle patent (10660473), asserting that core features are obvious in light of prior art. The petitioner relies on multiple combinations of references, including Williams and May/Best, to invalidate numerous claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.