US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 353 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent final
Google LLC v.Dialect LLC
· IPR2024-00752
The PTAB found that claims 1-7, 12-17, and 19-23 were unpatentable over prior art (Coffman/Kennewick/Lee) based on obviousness. The Board adopted the Petitioner's view that 'synchronize' only requires updating context information without duplicating entry order.
patent Unpatentable
Google LLC v.Dialect LLC
· IPR2024-00753
The PTAB found Claim 12 unpatentable as obvious over the combination of Kennewick and Ross. The Board concluded that a POSITA would have been motivated to combine these prior art references with reasonable expectation of success, particularly regarding context management in speech recognition.
patent Final Written Decision
TESLA, INC. v.Autonomous Devices, LLC
· IPR2024-00745
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that several original claims were unpatentable over Buibas in view of Sinyavskiy. However, the Board subsequently found the petitioner's substitute claims obvious over combinations of Grotmol and Zhu prior art, leading to further rejection.
patent final
Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution, LLC v.Digital Media Technology Holdings, LLC
· IPR2024-00736
The PTAB found the challenged claims unpatentable for obviousness (103), specifically concluding that prior art references taught every element of Independent Claim 1. The Board also adopted broad claim constructions, rejecting narrow interpretations proposed by the Patent Owner regarding terms like 'Exhibitor' and 'Distribution'.
patent Final Written Decision
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00735
The PTAB found that claims 1-6 and 9-13 were unpatentable over Kaplan and Bryant under 35 U.S.C. § 103, while rejecting the challenge to claims 7, 8, 14, and 15 due to insufficient evidence of prior art accessibility. The Board adopted the Patent Owner's construction for 'user profile,' aligning with district court findings.
patent Final Written Decision
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Lionra Technologies Limited
· IPR2024-00734
The PTAB found claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on a combination of prior art references (Gai, Yip, Kwan, and Georgiou). The Board determined that an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine these teachings to enhance network security and implement advanced ACL functions.
patent Final Written Decision
Apple Inc. v.Poniatowski, Paul et al.
· IPR2024-00731
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 27 challenged claims of Patent 8,270,578 B2 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board accepted the Petitioner's arguments regarding claim construction and found that prior art references (Wang, Dua, Yong) taught the subject matter through obvious combinations.
patent final
Intel Corporation et al. v.TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET L M ERICSSON et al.
· IPR2024-00728
The PTAB found multiple claims of the '430 patent unpatentable over prior art, primarily Taniguchi. The Board adopted Petitioner's construction that key claim terms were not limiting, supporting obviousness findings across several grounds.
patent final
VIZIO, Inc. v.Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2024-00723
The PTAB found all 12 challenged claims unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board concluded that combining various prior art references—including Kim, TechnoBuffalo, and Ma—rendered the VOD user interface methods obvious.
patent final
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2024-00717
The PTAB found all 11 challenged claims unpatentable by obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). Petitioner successfully demonstrated that combining various prior art references—including Chinn, Takahashi, and Kim—would render the claimed features obvious to a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA).
patent final
Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation
· IPR2024-00714
The PTAB found all 20 challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,627,907 B2 unpatentable under both § 102 and § 103. The Board rejected the patent owner's narrow claim constructions, finding them inconsistent with intrinsic evidence, and concluded that prior art references (Goldenberg, Rosenberg) anticipated or rendered the claims obvious.
patent final
Salvacion USA, Inc. et al. v.Trutek Corp.
· IPR2024-00711
The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that the challenged claims (1-3 and 8) were anticipated by multiple prior art references, including Chen. The Board found that the prior art disclosed all claim elements, leading to a final decision of unpatentability.
patent Final Written Decision
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.WellcomeMat, LLC
· IPR2024-00710
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding multiple claims unpatentable based on anticipation and obviousness grounds. Specifically, Claims 13-15 and 17-20 were found unpatentable over prior art references Fegan and Vasilevsky/Logan. The Board also denied the Petitioner's motion to exclude exhibits.
patent final
BTL Industries, Inc. v.InMode Ltd.
· IPR2024-00703
The PTAB issued a final written decision rejecting all 58 claims of the patent owner's application. The Board found that the Petitioner failed to meet its burden of proof regarding obviousness over combinations of prior art references (Edwards, Mosher, Ingle, Ollivier).
patent final
Kohler Co. v.Delta Faucet Company et al.
· IPR2024-00700
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.
patent final
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Intent IQ, LLC
· IPR2024-00701
The PTAB issued a final decision rejecting the petitioner's challenge to claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 10715878. The Board found that the evidence failed to demonstrate unpatentability under 35 U.S.C. § 103, upholding the patent owner’s rights regarding targeted advertising methods.
patent final
Kohler Co. v.Delta Faucet Company et al.
· IPR2024-00700
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 Final Written Decision
VIZIO, Inc. v.Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2024-00699
The PTAB found that multiple claims of the '805 patent were unpatentable based on obviousness (103), primarily over a combination of prior art references Melnychenko and Chen. Key claim constructions favored the Petitioner, particularly regarding 'pre-defined format' as merely an order of data/metadata.
patent final
Apple Inc. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00698
The Board issued a Final Written Decision finding all five claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that the claimed invention was obvious over various combinations of prior art references, including Izumi and Cosper.
patent Final Written Decision
VIZIO, Inc. v.Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2024-00696
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that all challenged claims (1-14) were patentable over the prior art. The Board adopted the Patent Owner's construction of key terms like 'based on,' requiring temporal dependency on currently displayed content.
patent final
Apple Inc. v.Resonant Systems, Inc.
· IPR2024-00697
The Board found all five challenged claims unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. Petitioner successfully argued that combining existing technologies was obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA).
patent Final Written Decision
VIZIO, Inc. v.Multimedia Technologies Pte. Ltd.
· IPR2024-00694
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding multiple claims of U.S. Patent No. 9510040 unpatentable based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board determined that the combination of prior art references, including Kim and Choi, provided sufficient motivation to combine teachings for various smart TV features.
patent Final Written Decision
Bizlink Technology, Inc., et al. v.Ander Power Products, Inc.
· IPR2024-00687
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding several claims unpatentable based on anticipation (102) and obviousness (103). The Board adopted specific claim constructions for 'insulating' as 'electrically insulating' and 'within' as 'on the inside of.'
patent final
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
· IPR2024-00671
The PTAB found that eight claims of the patent were unpatentable over prior art combinations, specifically regarding jump starting devices with USB charging capabilities. The Board concluded that a skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine existing technologies for convenience and practical benefit.
