US PTAB IP Litigation

Sony Interactive Entertainment Inc. et al. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.

· IPR2024-00568

Sony Interactive Entertainment's IPR challenge against Resonant Systems was denied by the PTAB, finding that Sony failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success on any challenged claim. The Board adopted the Patent Owner's view regarding the 'control component,' requiring an algorithmic structure for obviousness.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00441

The PTAB institution decision found that the Petitioner successfully demonstrated unpatentability of numerous claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board relied heavily on combinations of prior art references, notably Kamieniecki and Konstantinos, to support its findings against the patent owner. This outcome significantly strengthens the petitioner's position in the ongoing litigation.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00440

Comcast's attempt to challenge Entropic's wideband receiver patent in a third parallel IPR was denied by the PTAB, citing procedural guidance against redundant petitions.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00438

Comcast Cable Communications successfully secured institution at the PTAB for its IPR against Entropic Communications, challenging 76 claims. The Board declined to use discretionary denial despite the petitioner's filing of multiple parallel proceedings.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00439

Comcast's attempt to challenge Entropic's wideband receiver patent was denied by the PTAB due to a previously instituted parallel proceeding.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00437

The PTAB denied Comcast's request to institute an IPR against Entropic's patent, citing the existence of a parallel petition. The Board determined that one petition was sufficient and denying the second would prevent unnecessary burden.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00435

The PTAB instituted the IPR, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for Comcast's claims against Entropic Communications. The grounds centered on anticipation and obviousness using prior art references like Zhang, Reisman, Jackson, and Pandey.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00437

The PTAB denied institution for IPR2024-00437, meaning the challenger's claims against Comcast were not moved forward.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00436

The PTAB denied Comcast's request to institute IPR against Entropic's patent 11381866, citing the existence of a parallel petition. The decision emphasizes the Board's policy favoring single petitions for efficiency.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00434

The PTAB denied Comcast's request to institute IPR against Entropic's wideband tuner patent (9210362) because the petitioner had filed a parallel petition on the same claims.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00432

Comcast Cable Communications successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Entropic's wideband receiver patent (9210362). The Board found a reasonable likelihood that Comcast could prevail, allowing review of all 20 claims.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00433

The PTAB denied Comcast's petition to challenge patent 9210362, citing the existence of a parallel IPR proceeding that had already been instituted.

Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation

· IPR2024-00582

The PTAB found all nine challenged claims of the '738 patent unpatentable under both 102 and 103. The Board adopted a broad claim construction for "haptic effect," allowing for combined or modified effects, which was critical to the petitioner's success.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00441

The IPR concluded that the Petitioner successfully demonstrated claims 1-18 were unpatentable over prior art references based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board found a clear motivation to combine Kamieniecki and Konstantinos, overcoming the Patent Owner's arguments regarding redesign complexity.

Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC

· IPR2024-00438

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 76 challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,399,206 B2 unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board relied heavily on anticipation (102) and obviousness (103), primarily using Zhang et al. as primary prior art.