US PTAB IP Litigation

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00515

Court decision.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00517

Aylo Freesites requests Director Review after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR on DISH's multi‑bitrate streaming patent, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and ignored the merits of the Leaning reference.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00517

Aylo Freesites Ltd filed a Request for Director Review challenging the PTAB’s denial of institution in IPR2024‑00517, arguing the Board misapplied the General Plastic analysis and Fintiv factors.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00514

The USPTO Director denied Aylo Freesites’ request for a review of the institution decisions in multiple IPRs, including the case involving DISH Technologies’ patent 10,469,554. The denial leaves the original institution outcomes in place.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00515

Aylo Freesites Ltd seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s denial to institute an IPR against DISH Technologies’ patent, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and failed to consider the petition’s merits.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00513

Aylo Freesites Ltd petitions the PTAB Director to overturn a discretionary denial of institution for an IPR targeting DISH's adaptive‑streaming patent. The petitioner contends the Board failed to consider the merits of its "Leaning" prior art reference and misapplied General Plastic factors.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00514

Aylo Freesites Ltd filed a Director Review request challenging the PTAB’s denial to institute IPR2024‑00514, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and made factual errors.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00512

Aylo Freesites filed Director Review requests challenging the PTAB’s discretionary denial of institution for eight IPRs against DISH Technologies. The petitioner alleges the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and erred on material facts. The review seeks reversal of the denial.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00512

Aylo Freesites seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s denial to institute an IPR against DISH Technologies’ multi-bitrate streaming patent, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and ignored the merits of its petition. The petition relies on the strong prior art reference WO 02/49343 A1 (“Leaning”).

patent terminated or settled · Jan 30, 2024

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00516

The USPTO Director denied Aylo Freesites’ request for review of the PTAB’s denial to institute several IPRs, including the challenge to DISH Technologies’ patent 10,951,680. The institution decisions remain denied.

Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC

· IPR2024-00511

Motorola Solutions and STA Group have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,319,852 and jointly moved to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317(a).

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00513

Aylo Freesites filed a Director Review request after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against DISH Technologies’ patent. The petitioner alleges the board misapplied General Plastic analysis and Fintiv factors. The case remains pending director review.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00458

The USPTO denied director review requests for two IPR institution decisions involving Microsoft and other PC makers against LiTL LLC, leaving the original institution outcomes unchanged.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00458

Microsoft filed a request for Director Review seeking reversal of the PTAB’s denial to institute an IPR against LiTL’s ‘818 GUI patent. The petition alleges the Board misapplied obviousness law and acted inconsistently with a related granted IPR.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00457

The USPTO denied Microsoft’s request for Director review of the PTAB’s decision denying institution of IPR2024-00457 (and the related IPR2024-00458). The denial leaves the institution refusal in place.

Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc. et al.

· IPR2024-00526

Nanostring Technologies challenges U.S. Patent No. 11,542,554 in a PTAB Petition, arguing that numerous claims are obvious over combinations of prior art references like Zhuang, Cai, and Shen. The petitioner asserts the core technology for 3D positional information in nucleic acid imaging was already well-known in biological imaging.

Next Step Group, Inc. v.Deckers Outdoor Corporation

· IPR2024-00525

Next Step Group challenges Deckers Outdoor Corporation's '161 patent design in a PTAB petition, asserting invalidity under both anticipation (§102) and obviousness (§103). The petitioner relies on various prior art references, including competitor products like the Emu Stinger Micro Boot and UGG Classic Mini.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00519

Aylo Freesites Ltd filed a Petition challenging 21 claims of the '772 Patent related to adaptive streaming content delivery. The petitioner asserts that these claims are obvious in view of prior art references, specifically Leaning and Gamble.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00518

Aylo Freesites Ltd challenges DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s patent (9407564) on adaptive bitrate streaming, arguing that claims 1-16 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner asserts that prior art references, particularly Leaning and Gamble, disclose the claimed elements of network performance monitoring and sequential playback.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00517

Aylo Freesites Ltd challenges DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s '798 Patent in an IPR proceeding based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The petitioner argues that prior art references, including Leaning and Allen, render the claimed adaptive bitrate streaming technology predictable. This initial petition sets the stage for a detailed technical battle over content delivery methods.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00516

Aylo Freesites Ltd challenges DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s patent (US 10,951,680) in a PTAB petition, arguing that the adaptive bitrate streaming claims are obvious. The petitioner relies heavily on prior art references Leaning, Allen, and SMIL 2.0 to demonstrate lack of novelty and non-obviousness.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00515

Aylo Freesites Ltd challenges DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s patent (10,469,555) in an IPR proceeding based on anticipation and obviousness. The petitioner argues that the patented multi-bitrate content streaming system is rendered invalid by prior art references Leaning and Allen. This challenge targets a wide range of claims related to adaptive bitrate technology.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00514

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. challenged U.S. Patent No. 10,469,554 regarding Adaptive Bitrate Streaming (ABR) under Section 103. The petition asserts that the claimed streaming methods are obvious in view of prior art references including Leaning, Allen, and SMIL 2.0.