US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 330 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Mar 15, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00626
Nokia filed a Director Review request asking the USPTO to vacate the PTAB's decision to institute an IPR against its patent 11805267, alleging abuse of discretion and citing statutory and prior‑art grounds.
patent null · Mar 15, 2024
Lenovo (United States), Inc. et al. v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al.
· IPR2024-00702
Lenovo challenged Ericsson's patent on IMSI encryption technologies before the PTAB, arguing that the claims are obvious in light of prior art. The petitioner relies on combinations of Nair and Forsberg, along with 3GPP standards, to demonstrate lack of non-obviousness. This petition asserts that existing knowledge made the claimed security enhancements predictable.
patent null · Mar 15, 2024
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD.
· IPR2024-00695
Cisco Systems, Inc. filed a Petition challenging the validity of patent 8649426 owned by VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD., asserting that the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner argues that prior art references Perlman and Oguz teach known solutions for reducing video encoding latency, rendering the claimed methods unpatentable.
patent null · Mar 15, 2024
2985 LLC d/b/a Mountain Voyage Co. v.The Ridge Wallet LLC
· IPR2024-00692
Mountain Voyage Co. challenges The Ridge Wallet's compact wallet patents (10791808) based on obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Petitioner presents multiple combinations of prior art, including Kane in view of Beckley, Pelz, and Matthews, to demonstrate the claimed features are predictable.
patent instituted · Mar 15, 2024
Capital One, National Association et al. v.--
· IPR2024-00643
Capital One National Association filed an IPR challenging Implicit, LLC's patent 8056075 on grounds of obviousness (35 U.S.C. §103). The petition asserts that the claims are rendered unpatentable by various combinations of prior art references including Fowlow and Kimera.
patent null · Mar 15, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00627
Amazon challenges Nokia's video coding patent (11805267), arguing that the claimed weighted bi-directional motion prediction is anticipated by prior art. The petitioner relies heavily on Karczewicz references to demonstrate that using higher precision for intermediate calculations was already known in the field.
patent denied · Mar 15, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00626
Amazon challenged Nokia's video coding patent (11805267) before the PTAB, arguing that the claimed methods are obvious over prior art references. The Board denied the petition, finding no basis for discretionary denial under §325(d).
patent instituted · Mar 15, 2024
Lenovo (United States), Inc. et al. v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al.
· IPR2024-00702
Lenovo successfully convinced the PTAB to institute an IPR against Ericsson's patent (10425817) covering 5G security protocols. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing based on combinations of prior art references, leading to a trial proceeding.
patent instituted · Mar 15, 2024
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD.
· IPR2024-00695
Cisco Systems successfully secured the institution of its IPR against VIDEO SOLUTIONS PTE. LTD., challenging 13 claims related to low latency video conferencing over § 103 obviousness. The Board found compelling evidence that Cisco has a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple independent and dependent claims, moving the dispute into active litigation.
patent instituted · Mar 15, 2024
2985 LLC d/b/a Mountain Voyage Co. v.The Ridge Wallet LLC
· IPR2024-00692
The PTAB instituted an IPR petition challenging 21 claims of The Ridge Wallet LLC's '808 patent based on anticipation and obviousness. The Board found that the Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success, specifically noting the Examiner overlooked material teachings in Kane and Beckley regarding key structural elements.
patent instituted · Mar 15, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00627
Amazon successfully navigated the institution phase of its IPR against Nokia regarding video coding claims. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that Amazon could prove unpatentability under § 103, leading to the case being instituted for trial.
patent instituted · Mar 15, 2024
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2024-00626
Amazon successfully challenged Nokia's patent claims in an IPR proceeding regarding video coding and motion prediction technology. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the grounds of obviousness over prior art, leading to institution.
patent · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00686
Dell and AX Wireless have jointly moved to terminate IPR 2024-00686 after reaching a settlement, citing 35 U.S.C. § 317. The Board previously denied a termination request, but the parties submitted a renewed motion.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00686
Dell and AX Wireless settled their dispute, leading to the termination of eight inter partes review proceedings covering patents on wireless networking. The Board granted the parties' joint motions to terminate and treated the settlement agreements as confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00685
Dell and AX Wireless settled eight inter partes review proceedings before they were instituted. The Board granted the parties' joint motions to terminate and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00685
Dell Inc. and Dell Technologies have jointly moved to terminate IPR2024-00685 concerning AX Wireless's patent 10,079,707 after reaching a settlement and filing a joint stipulation for dismissal in federal court.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00685
Dell and AX Wireless jointly moved to terminate the IPR over patent 10,079,707, citing a settlement and the Board’s lack of merit decision. The motion invokes 35 U.S.C. §317 and requests confidentiality for the settlement documents.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00682
Dell and AX Wireless jointly moved to terminate IPR 2024-00682 after reaching a settlement and filing a joint stipulation for dismissal in the Eastern District of Texas.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00680
Dell and AX Wireless jointly moved to terminate IPR 2024-00680 concerning patent 9,614,566 after reaching a settlement, filing a joint stipulation for dismissal in the Eastern District of Texas.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00680
Dell and AX Wireless settled eight inter partes review proceedings covering wireless patents. The Board granted joint motions to terminate the IPRs and treated the settlement agreements as confidential.
patent · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00680
Dell Inc. and AX Wireless have filed a renewed joint motion to terminate their inter partes review, citing a settlement and a joint dismissal stipulation. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. § 317.
patent · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00683
Dell Inc. and AX Wireless have jointly moved to terminate the IPR over patent 10,554,459 after reaching a settlement, filing a joint stipulation for dismissal in the Eastern District of Texas.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00682
Dell and AX Wireless settled eight inter partes review proceedings before any trial was instituted. The Board granted the joint motions to terminate and treated the settlement agreements as confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 14, 2024
DELL INC. et al. v.AX Wireless, LLC et al.
· IPR2024-00686
Dell and AX Wireless jointly moved to terminate IPR 2024-00686 after reaching a settlement. The Board accepted the motion under 35 U.S.C. §317, ending the proceeding without a merits decision.
