US PTAB IP Litigation

Lenovo (United States), Inc. et al. v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al.

· IPR2024-00702

Lenovo and Ericsson settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 10,425,817, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding. The settlement agreement was ordered to be kept confidential.

Lenovo (United States), Inc. et al. v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al.

· IPR2024-00702

Lenovo and Ericsson have jointly filed a motion to keep their settlement agreement confidential under statutory provisions, seeking business‑confidential treatment separate from the public patent file.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD.

Cisco Systems and Video Solutions settled their IPR dispute over patent 8,649,426, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding and keep the settlement agreement confidential.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD.

Cisco and Video Solutions have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,649,426 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites public‑policy reasons and the Board’s guidance favoring settlement.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD.

Cisco and Video Solutions jointly requested confidentiality for their settlement agreement and moved to terminate IPR2024-00695 concerning patent 8,649,426.

2985 LLC d/b/a Mountain Voyage Co. v.The Ridge Wallet LLC

· IPR2024-00692

The Ridge Wallet and Mountain Voyage Co. settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,791,808 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board was urged to terminate based on public policy favoring settlement and the lack of any merits decision.

Capital One, National Association et al. v.--

Capital One and Hulu filed an unopposed motion to keep their settlement with Implicit confidential and to end the IPR over patent 8,056,075. The motion cites 35 U.S.C. §317 and related regulations.

Capital One, National Association et al. v.--

Hulu and Capital One, together with Implicit, settled a dispute over a video‑streaming patent, prompting an unopposed motion to terminate the IPR.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

Amazon and Nokia have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,805,267. They jointly filed a request to treat the settlement documents as business confidential information and to terminate the proceeding.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

patent denied · Mar 15, 2024

Amazon and Nokia have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,805,267 and jointly request that the settlement documents be kept confidential, moving to terminate the proceeding.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD.

The PTAB denied Cisco's request for Director Review of the institution decision in IPR2024-00695, leaving the institution of the challenged patent claims intact.

Capital One, National Association et al. v.--

patent denied · Mar 15, 2024

Capital One filed an unopposed motion to terminate IPR2024-00643 concerning patent 8056075. The Board has not yet ruled, but the motion seeks dismissal of the proceeding.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

The USPTO Director denied Amazon's request for review of the institution decisions in two IPRs involving Nokia's patent 11,805,267. The order affirms that the institution decisions stand.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD.

Chris Hoff of Barnes & Thornburg filed a Director Review request on behalf of VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD. after the Board instituted IPR2024-00695 against Cisco Systems. The owner contends the Board’s sua sponte arguments merit a higher‑level review.

Capital One, National Association et al. v.--

Hulu and Capital One filed an unopposed motion to keep their settlement with Implicit confidential and to terminate the IPR over U.S. Pat. 8,056,075 covering web session management.

2985 LLC d/b/a Mountain Voyage Co. v.The Ridge Wallet LLC

· IPR2024-00692

The Ridge Wallet and Mountain Voyage Co. settled their IPR dispute over patent 10,791,808, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding and keep the settlement agreement confidential.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

Amazon and Nokia settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,805,267 B2, leading the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review after the parties jointly requested termination and sought confidentiality for the settlement documents.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

Amazon and Nokia settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,805,267 B2. The PTAB granted the parties' joint motion to terminate the inter‑ partes review and treated the settlement documents as business‑confidential.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

Amazon and Nokia have settled their dispute over a video‑capable device patent and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review, citing statutory authority and public‑policy benefits of settlement.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

patent denied · Mar 15, 2024

Amazon has filed a petition for rehearing, asking the Director to vacate the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against Nokia’s video‑coding patent covering bi‑prediction. Nokia argues the Board erred under § 325(d) by revisiting arguments already considered during prosecution.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

The USPTO Director denied Amazon’s request for a Director Review of the institution decisions in two IPRs involving Nokia’s patent 11,805,267, leaving the institution rulings in place.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy

Amazon seeks rehearing to overturn the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against Nokia’s video‑coding patent. Nokia argues the Board misapplied 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) because the prior art and arguments were already considered during prosecution.

Capital One, National Association et al. v.--

Hulu and Capital One settled their dispute with patent owner Implicit over U.S. Patent 8,056,075 B2. The PTAB granted a motion to terminate the IPR and ordered the settlement agreements kept confidential.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy