US PTAB IP Litigation

ToughBuilt Industries, Inc. v.Meridian International Co. Ltd.

· IPR2025-01461

ToughBuilt Industries petitions the PTAB to invalidate Meridian International’s 11,192,689 patent covering a stackable storage system with a sliding latch. The petition alleges anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references, seeking cancellation of all 20 claims.

Generac Power Systems, Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

patent terminated or settled · Aug 28, 2025

MWE Investments and Champion Power Equipment have settled their IPR dispute and request the Board treat the settlement agreement as confidential, keeping it separate from the patent file and limiting access to government agencies or parties with good cause.

Generac Power Systems, Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

The PTAB granted a settlement motion, terminating the IPRs against Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. and MWE Investments, LLC, while Generac Power Systems continues as the remaining petitioner. Settlement agreements were ordered confidential.

Generac Power Systems, Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

Generac, Harbor Freight, and MWE filed a joint request with the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement (Exhibit 1300) confidential, limiting access to federal agencies or parties with good cause.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.

Maxell’s preliminary response urges the PTAB to deny Samsung’s IPR petition, arguing the prior art does not disclose the claimed mobile‑terminal features and that Samsung’s claim‑construction reservations violate procedural rules.

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.

· IPR2025-01313

Maxell’s preliminary response urges the PTAB to deny Samsung’s IPR petition, contending that the prior art never teaches the claimed ‘unlock’ function and that Samsung’s expert testimony is conclusory.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.

Maxell filed a preliminary sur‑reply opposing Samsung’s IPR petition on U.S. Patent 7,577,417, arguing that ‘mobile terminal’ means a cellular phone and urging the Board to deny institution.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.W&Wsens Devices Inc.

· PGR2025-00082

Samsung petitions the PTAB to invalidate W&Wsens' 12,243,948 patent covering microstructured photodetectors, asserting obviousness over Kuboi, Vasylyev and Shinohara and lack of enablement.

ToughBuilt Industries, Inc. v.Meridian International Co. Ltd.

· IPR2025-01461

ToughBuilt Industries has filed an IPR petition challenging all 16 claims of Meridian International’s ’946 patent covering a stackable storage box with a stop‑part mechanism. The petitioner alleges the invention is anticipated or obvious over multiple prior‑art references, including Li and Baruch. The Board is asked to institute the trial and invalidate the patent.

ToughBuilt Industries, Inc. v.Meridian International Co. Ltd.

· IPR2025-01462

ToughBuilt Industries petitions the PTAB to invalidate Meridian International’s ’689 patent covering a stackable storage system, asserting anticipation and obviousness over a suite of prior‑art latch references.

Generac Power Systems, Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

Generac and co‑petitioners seek IPR on Champion’s dual‑fuel generator patent, alleging obviousness and anticipation over DuroMax, DeVries, Nakafushi, Olmr and Fujisawa. They also dispute the patent owner’s claim construction of the selector switch.

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.

· IPR2025-01313

Samsung petitions the PTAB to invalidate Maxell’s ’228 patent covering biometric unlock and communication between a smartwatch and smartphone, asserting that all 22 claims are obvious over prior art. The petition relies on six grounds under 35 U.S.C. § 103, combining Aminzade with Sowers, Soli, Hong, and Altman.

Apple Inc. v.Ginko LLC

· IPR2025-01388

Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging 12 claims of Ginko’s U.S. Pat. 11,025,573, asserting obviousness over the Robertson and Ahuja prior‑art references. The petition seeks cancellation of the claims to nullify Ginko’s infringement allegations.

Ciena Corporation v.K.Mizra LLC

· IPR2025-01364

Ciena has filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent 10,735,320, asserting that all 20 claims are obvious over prior‑art MPLS technologies disclosed in Murphy, Taguchi, and Booth. The petition seeks institution of the IPR and cancellation of the claims.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.

Samsung Electronics filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all seven claims of Maxell’s U.S. Patent 7,577,417, arguing that the claims are obvious over prior‑art clock‑control patents (Belt, Foster, Norris, Alberth) under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.W&Wsens Devices Inc.

· PGR2025-00082

The PTAB granted institution for PGR2025-00082 after reviewing discretionary and non-discretionary considerations. The petitioner successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that the challenged claims are unpatentable.

ToughBuilt Industries, Inc. v.Meridian International Co. Ltd.

· IPR2025-01462

The USPTO Board granted institution for IPR2025-01462 after a merits review, finding the petitioner met the legal threshold. The notice also detailed multiple discretionary and non-discretionary denials across various proceedings.

patent denied · Aug 28, 2025

ToughBuilt Industries, Inc. v.Meridian International Co. Ltd.

· IPR2025-01461

The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01461 after determining the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that at least one challenged claim was unpatentable.

Apple Inc. v.Ginko LLC

· IPR2025-01388

Apple Inc.'s IPR petition against Ginko LLC was denied by the PTAB, as the Board found insufficient evidence that cited prior art disclosed the claimed contact permission settings.

patent denied · Aug 28, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Ginko LLC

· IPR2025-01388

The USPTO denied institution for IPR2025-01388 after determining the petitioner lacked a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. The decision is part of a larger notice covering multiple institutional reviews.

patent denied · Aug 28, 2025

Ciena Corporation v.K.Mizra LLC

· IPR2025-01364

The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01364 after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim.

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.

· IPR2025-01313

The USPTO Board denied institution of IPR2025-01313 after a merits review, finding the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.