US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 355 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent final
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Sitnet, LLC
· IPR2024-00612
The PTAB found that claims 12-21 of patent 8249932 were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Petitioner successfully demonstrated obviousness by combining prior art references, specifically Amidon and Walsh, to teach the claimed targeted advertising system in situational networks.
patent final
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. v.EVONIK OPERATIONS GMBH et al.
· IPR2024-00611
The IPR petition against EVONIK's gas separation membrane technology failed as the Petitioner could not establish unpatentability. The Board found that the combination of cited prior art references lacked a sufficient motivation to combine, upholding the patent's validity.
patent final
Champion Laboratories, Inc. et al. v.HENGST SE
· IPR2024-00603
The Petitioner failed to prove that the challenged claims of Patent No. 9,023,203 B2 were unpatentable by obviousness over prior art references Yokoyama, Cline, and Honermann. The Board found insufficient motivation for a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) to make the claimed structural modifications or reorient existing devices.
patent final
Ceva Sante Animal S.A. et al. v.Targan, Inc.
· IPR2024-00595
The PTAB found that claims 1-15 of the patent are unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. The Board's construction of 'unrestrained chick' was crucial, defining it as a chick free to open its wings on the moving platform.
patent Final Written Decision
Apple Inc. v.RJ Technology LLC
· IPR2024-00597
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding multiple claims of the patent unpatentable as obvious in view of prior art. The Board focused heavily on claim construction, specifically defining 'charge cut-off voltage' based on practical full-cell operation rather than just applied charging potential. Claims 2–4 and 6–18 were found invalid under 103.
patent final
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.
patent Final Written Decision
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc et al. v.The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania et al.
· IPR2024-00580
The Board issued a Final Written Decision upholding the validity of claim 8 in this gene therapy IPR. The decision found that Petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient motivation or reasonable expectation of success to combine prior art references under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
patent Final Written Decision
Microsoft Corporation v.Proxense, LLC
· IPR2024-00573
The PTAB found all nine challenged claims unpatentable over the combination of Giobbi ’1573, Giobbi ’1394, and Dua. The Board successfully rejected arguments regarding means-plus-function interpretation, finding key terms like 'PDK' and 'RDC' conveyed sufficient definite structure. This decision represents a significant win for the Petitioner in this IPR proceeding.
patent final
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
· IPR2024-00577
The PTAB found all seven challenged claims of the portable jump starter apparatus unpatentable based on obviousness. The Board successfully applied two distinct combinations of prior art references (Richardson/Zhao and Yu/Paparrizos) to reject the claims.
patent final
Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation
· IPR2024-00557
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding the patent claims unpatentable under both §102 and §103. The Board found that the prior art reference Rogers disclosed all limitations of the challenged claims, particularly regarding haptic output devices and sensor data integration in augmented reality systems.
patent final
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Monarch Networking Solutions LLC
· IPR2024-00561
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that claims 1 and 6 of the patent were unpatentable over prior art references Wainner and Bocci. The Board agreed with the Petitioner's argument that combining these references rendered the claimed method obvious, particularly regarding shared link functionality in pseudo-wires.
patent final
TESLA, INC. v.iQar Inc.
· IPR2024-00545
The PTAB found that multiple claims of the patent were unpatentable based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board concluded that prior art combination with Neiss supported the modifications to the patented system, particularly regarding route handling and iterative energy calculation. Claims 1–6, 8–15, 17, and 18 were found invalid.
patent Final Written Decision
Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation
· IPR2024-00556
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 18 claims of the Immersion patent unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Board adopted the Petitioner's (Valve Corporation) arguments that various combinations of prior art references rendered the invention obvious.
patent Denial of Request for Rehearing
TESLA, INC. v.iQar Inc.
· IPR2024-00543
The PTAB denied Tesla's request for rehearing on the Final Written Decision, upholding the finding that claims 8 and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,882,399 are unpatentable over Newstrom et al. The Board found Petitioner failed to adequately prove the database was remote.
patent final
Microsoft Corporation et al. v.InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00538
The Board upheld the validity of patent 9173054 after finding that the priority date (December 22, 2009) disqualified all cited prior art under Sections 102 and 103. The Patent Owner successfully argued that the ancestor application sufficiently described both Bluetooth detection and Wi-Fi data transfer methods.
patent final
TESLA, INC. v.iQar Inc.
· IPR2024-00543
The PTAB found that a majority of the claims (Claims 1–7, 9–17, 19, and 20) related to power management and route optimization systems were unpatentable based on obviousness. The Board relied heavily on combining prior art references like Hongo, Obradovich, and Niki to establish invalidity for the patent owner, iQar Inc.
patent Final Written Decision
Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al. v.Sung, Chien-Min
· IPR2024-00535
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that most claims (1-9 and 12-21) of the '802 patent were unpatentable over prior art references, primarily Tsai. The Board relied heavily on anticipation and obviousness grounds, while also addressing written description challenges to specific claim limitations.
patent final
Microsoft Corporation et al. v.InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc. et al.
· IPR2024-00537
The Board issued a final written decision finding that the challenged claims were not unpatentable. The Board upheld the patent owner's position regarding priority and found that the specification adequately supported the combination of Bluetooth detection and Wi-Fi data transfer.
patent final
Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al. v.Sung, Chien-Min
· IPR2024-00534
The PTAB found all 20 claims of U.S. Patent No. 9138862 unpatentable by anticipation or obviousness over Sung ’026. The technology relates to Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP) pad conditioning methods, and the Board concluded that Petitioner successfully established invalidity across all grounds presented.
patent final
Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al. v.Sung, Chien-Min
· IPR2024-00533
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all eight challenged claims unpatentable based on obviousness. The Board accepted the Petitioner's argument that combining Chou and Sung ’479 provided sufficient motivation to achieve the claimed narrow variation in CMP technology.
patent Final Written Decision
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Sitnet, LLC
· IPR2024-00530
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that the patent claims were unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board found obviousness over single and combined prior art references (Gage/Mitchell) for original claims, and also determined substitute claims failed both 103 and 101 standards.
patent final
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Sitnet, LLC
· IPR2024-00531
The PTAB issued a final decision finding all 20 claims of the patent unpatentable over a combination of Burfeind and Crowley. The Board adopted the petitioner's argument that the challenged claims were obvious, specifically noting that Crowley provided motivation to integrate location-based features into Burfeind's event management system.
patent Final Written Decision
Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.Throughtek Co., Ltd.
· IPR2024-00509
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding the challenged claims unpatentable over various combinations of prior art. The Board specifically found Claim 1 obvious over Lorex Guide and Kim, while also addressing issues of written description and statutory eligibility.
patent final
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Sitnet, LLC
· IPR2024-00529
The PTAB found that Claims 1-9 and 20 are unpatentable over prior art references (Amidon, Wong, Gogic) based on obviousness. Additionally, the Board granted an Adverse Judgment to cancel claims 10-19.
