US PTAB IP Litigation

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

· IPR2024-00512

Aylo Freesites Ltd challenges DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s adaptive bitrate streaming patent (11470138) before the PTAB, alleging obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 and anticipation under § 102. The petitioner relies heavily on prior art references Leaning, Allen, and SMIL 2.0 to demonstrate that the claimed streaming methods are already known in the industry.

Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC

· IPR2024-00511

Motorola Solutions challenges STA Group's wireless communications patent (9319852) in a PTAB petition. The petitioner asserts that the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103 based on various combinations of prior art, including Shaffer/Keller and Chowdhury/OMA-PoC Documents.

Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.Throughtek Co., Ltd.

· IPR2024-00509

Reolink Innovation Inc. successfully petitioned the PTAB to challenge U.S. Patent No. 847842 on grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petition presented multiple combinations of prior art, including Lorex Guide/Kim and Throughtek-2012/Lorex Video, arguing the claimed P2P connection methods were predictable.

Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation

· IPR2024-00508

The PTAB has instituted IPR proceedings against Immersion Corporation's patent, finding that the claims are anticipated or obvious over prior art references Rosenberg and Brock. The Board accepted the petitioner's arguments regarding how these older systems disclose modulated haptic effects based on extra-sensory input. This decision sets the stage for a detailed examination of the technical scope of haptic feedback in handheld devices.

Cisco Systems Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation

· IPR2024-00505

Cisco Systems Inc. initiated an IPR challenging Portsmouth Network Corporation's '986 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior art reference Gai. The petition focuses on Spanning Tree Protocol (STP), arguing that Gai discloses network reconfiguration methods applicable to both upstream and downstream dummy traffic during link failures.

Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC

· IPR2024-00479

Motorola Solutions challenged STA Group's patent (US 9319852) in an IPR, arguing that the claims are obvious over prior art references like Choksi and Shaffer1. The petitioner asserts that a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art would have been motivated to combine elements from the cited prior art to achieve the claimed interoperability functionality. This initial petition sets up a detailed technical dispute regarding dynamic proxy insertion and device adherence determination.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00458

Microsoft et al. filed a Petition challenging the validity of LiTL LLC's patent 10564818, asserting that all eight challenged claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petition centers on GUI functionality in portable computing modes, arguing combinations of prior art references render the claims unpatentable.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00457

Microsoft Corporation et al. filed an IPR petition challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,880,715 on multiple grounds of obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The challenger argues that all twenty claims are unpatentable by combining various prior art references, including Pröll and Preppernau.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00456

Microsoft Corporation filed an IPR challenging LiTL LLC's '8612888 patent on multiple grounds of obviousness (103). The petition argues that the claimed digital media management methods are predictable combinations of prior art references, including Reavey and Martinez. This challenges core aspects of the patent's validity in computing devices technology.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00455

Microsoft et al. filed an IPR challenging LiTL LLC's '315 patent on grounds of obviousness (103). The petition asserts that the claimed features are merely combinations of prior art references, including Reavey and Chandhri. This challenges core aspects of computer interface design in portable devices.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC

· IPR2024-00454

Microsoft filed an IPR petition challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,003,315 on obviousness grounds (35 U.S.C. § 103). The petitioner argues that the claimed GUI features are merely predictable combinations of prior art from Reavey, Chandhri, and Preppernau.

Apple Inc. v.Carbyne Biometrics, LLC

· IPR2024-00331

Apple Inc. successfully petitioned to challenge Carbyne Biometrics' patent claims, leading the PTAB to institute proceedings. The petition asserts that the biometric fraud detection technology is obvious over various combinations of prior art references.

Apple Inc. v.Carbyne Biometrics, LLC

· IPR2024-00330

Apple Inc. successfully petitioned the PTAB to challenge Carbyne Biometrics' patent (10713656) on grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petition asserts that combining existing prior art references, such as Stone and FFIEC Guidance, renders the claimed biometric fraud detection methods obvious.

Apple Inc. v.Carbyne Biometrics, LLC

· IPR2024-00329

Apple Inc. filed a Petition challenging Carbyne Biometrics' patent (9,972,010), arguing the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board has instituted the case, finding a reasonable likelihood that the challenged claims are unpatentable.

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

· IPR2024-00526

Bruker Spatial Biology successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against 10x Genomics, Inc., challenging numerous claims of patent 11542554. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the challenged claims are unpatentable based on grounds of obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103).

Next Step Group, Inc. v.Deckers Outdoor Corporation

· IPR2024-00525

The PTAB denied institution for Next Step Group's IPR against Deckers Outdoor Corporation regarding the Pull Tab Functional '161 patent. The Board found Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that the claimed ornamental design was anticipated or obvious over the asserted prior art.

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

· IPR2024-00519

The PTAB denied institution for Aylo Freesites Ltd's IPR challenge against DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s patent, citing failures under the General Plastic factors. The Board found that the petitioner lacked sufficient diligence in prior art searching and failed to adequately justify petition timing.

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

· IPR2024-00518

The PTAB denied the IPR petition filed by Aylo Freesites Ltd against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing a failure to demonstrate reasonable diligence in its prior art search and unfavorable General Plastic factors. The Board found that the Petitioner could not have reasonably avoided finding highly relevant references, leading to the denial of institution for all 16 claims at issue.

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

· IPR2024-00517

The PTAB denied institution of an IPR petition filed by Aylo Freesites Ltd against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing failure to demonstrate reasonable diligence in prior art search and tactical delays. The Board relied on General Plastic factors, finding the overlap between petitions was significant and Petitioner failed to justify its timing or discovery efforts regarding new references.

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

· IPR2024-00516

The PTAB denied institution of the IPR petition against DISH Technologies L.L.C., finding that Aylo Freesites Ltd failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in its prior art search. The Board relied on General Plastic factors, noting substantial similarities between the cited references and suggesting a skilled searcher would have found them earlier.

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

· IPR2024-00515

The PTAB denied institution for Aylo Freesites Ltd et al.'s IPR against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing failure to meet diligence requirements. The Board found that Petitioner failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in searching for primary prior art, leading to a discretionary denial under General Plastic factors.

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

· IPR2024-00514

The PTAB denied institution of the IPR petition filed by Aylo Freesites Ltd et al., citing a lack of diligence in prior art searching and procedural issues. The Board found that Petitioner failed to substantiate its search efforts, compounded by the existence of similar references cited during prosecution.

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

· IPR2024-00513

The PTAB denied institution for Aylo Freesites Ltd's IPR petition against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing a lack of reasonable diligence in the prior art search. The Board found that Petitioner failed to justify significant gaps in filing and knowledge regarding relevant references.