US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 345 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld
ZF Active Safety and Electronics US LLC v.Facet Technology Corp.
· IPR2025-00749
Mobileye Global successfully convinced the PTAB that several claims of Facet Technology's patent were obvious in light of prior art references Gallagher and Schofield. The Board found Claims 1-4, 8-13 unpatentable based on a combination of these references, while upholding the validity of other claims (5-7, 14-16).
patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld
Nintendo Co. Ltd. et al. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-00680
Apple Inc. successfully demonstrated obviousness against certain claims of Resonant Systems, Inc.'s patent (8860337) in a PTAB Final Written Decision. The Board found that Claims 2 and 3 were unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
patent all challenged claims upheld
ZF Active Safety and Electronics US LLC v.Facet Technology Corp.
· IPR2025-00748
Mobileye Global's challenge to Facet Technology Corp.'s road sign recognition patent failed before the PTAB, upholding claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 9335255. The Board found insufficient evidence that combining prior art references would render the claimed method obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld
Webgroup Czech Republic, a.s. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
· IPR2025-00348
The PTAB found that the patent claims were largely obvious over prior art references Leaning and Gamble in the field of Adaptive Bitrate Streaming. Specifically, Claims 2 and 9 were deemed obvious when combining Leaning with Gamble's TCP protocols.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Webgroup Czech Republic, a.s. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
· IPR2025-00347
The PTAB found that all 16 claims of the patent are unpatentable over prior art references, Leaning and Gamble. The Board concluded that the combination of references rendered specific claims obvious, while other claims were anticipated by Leaning alone.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
GOOGLE LLC v.EscapeX IP LLC
· IPR2025-00337
Google LLC successfully invalidated EscapeX IP LLC's patent (10474687) in the PTAB, finding all 24 claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board relied on combinations of prior art references like Fuloria and Andler to demonstrate that the claimed content engagement systems were predictable advancements in social networking technology.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
LG ELECTRONICS, INC. et al. v.Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00300
VIZIO successfully convinced the PTAB that MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES PTE. LTD.'s claims related to VOD user interfaces were obvious over prior art references. The Board found that combining existing concepts from sources like TechnoBuffalo and Kim provided sufficient motivation for a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA).
patent all challenged claims upheld
Microsoft Corporation v.EyesMatch Ltd.
· IPR2025-00297
The PTAB upheld all claims of the patent in this final written decision after rejecting multiple grounds of obviousness (103). The Board adopted specific claim constructions for 'mirror-mimicking' and 'varying rate,' finding the petitioner failed to meet its burden of proof.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Microsoft Corporation v.EyesMatch Ltd.
· IPR2025-00296
Google LLC successfully convinced the PTAB that all 18 challenged claims of EyesMatch Ltd.'s patent were unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. The Board adopted a specific construction for 'mirror tracking mode,' which was central to finding obviousness across multiple grounds.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Mundra Solar PV Ltd. et al. v.Trina Solar Co. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00187
The PTAB found all 17 challenged claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103, concluding that the combination of prior art references was sufficient to teach the claimed solar cell structure. This decision validates the Petitioner's arguments regarding obviousness in photovoltaic technology.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Apple Inc. v.DH International Ltd
· IPR2025-00172
The PTAB determined that all 20 challenged claims of the '294 patent were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103, finding obviousness over combinations of Suga and Gorsuch. The Board successfully rejected the Patent Owner's attempts to narrow key claim terms, upholding the Petitioner's broad interpretation of functional language.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Mundra Solar PV Ltd. et al. v.Trina Solar Co. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00186
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that all 11 challenged claims of the solar cell patent were obvious over prior art references. The Board credited the petitioner's evidence, concluding that an ordinary artisan would have combined Chang and Jin to achieve the claimed isolation features with reasonable success.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Imperative Care, Inc. v.Inari Medical, Inc.
· IPR2025-00156
The Board found that the claims were obvious over prior art references by combining known features to achieve a predictable result. Despite initial disputes over claim construction, the Petitioner failed to provide sufficient motivation for combining specific prior art elements.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable
Apple Inc. v.Proxense, LLC
· IPR2025-00075
Apple Inc. successfully convinced the PTAB that Proxense, LLC’s patent claims were obvious over multiple combinations of prior art references (Dua, Giobbi '157, Kotola). The Board found all 20 challenged claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
patent final
Google LLC et al. v.Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00060
The PTAB found all 14 challenged claims unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. Petitioner successfully demonstrated anticipation under § 102 and obviousness under § 103 using prior art references Ogawa, Choi, and Yook. The Board adopted broad claim constructions for 'open application state' and 'display.'
patent Final Written Decision
Google LLC et al. v.Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00059
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 12 claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,141,135 B2 unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board relied heavily on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103) based on combinations of prior art references Yook, Bauer, and Lee. This decision significantly weakens the patent's validity in the context of multi-screen user interfaces.
patent Final Written Decision
MediaTek Inc. et al. v.ParkerVision, Inc.
· IPR2025-00030
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 20 challenged claims of the '593 patent unpatentable. The Board adopted Petitioner's view on claim construction for "power efficiency," allowing indirect measurements (voltage/current) rather than strictly a ratio, which was key to establishing obviousness.
patent final
Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Tecan Group AG
· IPR2025-00016
The PTAB issued a final written decision rejecting all grounds of unpatentability asserted by the Petitioner regarding NGS target enrichment claims. The Board adopted the Patent Owner's narrow definition of 'enrichment,' finding that the prior art failed to teach the claimed proportional increase in target fragments.
patent final
Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Tecan Group AG
· IPR2025-00015
The PTAB upheld the patent against IPR challenges related to NGS target enrichment. The Board clarified that 'enrichment' requires an increased proportion of the sequence relative to others, not just a raw increase in fragment count. Petitioner failed to meet its burden of proof on unpatentability.
patent Final Written Decision
Runergy Alabama Inc et al. v.Trina Solar Co. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00007
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 11 challenged claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Board found that the Petitioner successfully demonstrated obviousness over combinations of prior art, specifically involving Chang and Jin for isolation regions in solar cells.
patent final
Runergy Alabama Inc et al. v.Trina Solar Co. Ltd.
· IPR2025-00006
The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that all 17 challenged claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Board found specific combinations of prior art, notably Chang and Jin, rendered the claimed solar cell structures obvious.
patent final
Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Tecan Group AG
· IPR2024-01504
The PTAB found multiple claims unpatentable under both § 102 (anticipation) and § 103 (obviousness). The decision centered on the combination of prior art references—specifically Iafrate, Kivioja, and Bielas—in the context of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies. Claim construction was finalized, defining key terms like 'identifier site' and 'indexing site'.
patent final
Dr. Squatch, LLC v.The Procter & Gamble Company
· IPR2024-01498
The PTAB found all 19 challenged claims unpatentable based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art would have been motivated to combine various prior art references for predictable results. This decision confirms the validity of the combination approach under POSA principles in deodorant formulation technology.
patent Final Written Decision
Menard, Inc. v.Signify Holdings B.V. et al.
· IPR2024-01469
The Final Written Decision found that most claims (1-7, 9-15, and 18-20) were unpatentable under § 103 based on prior art combinations. The Board affirmed the Petitioner's success in demonstrating obviousness over references like Chaimberg and Roberge for several claim groups. While some procedural issues regarding timeliness were resolved favorably for the Petitioner, the core finding was a rejection of broad claims due to anticipation and obviousness.
