US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 50 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Aug 22, 2025
CYBERSECURE IPS, LLC et al. v.Network Integrity Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-01441
CyberSecure IPS petitions the PTAB to institute an IPR against Network Integrity Systems’ ’641 patent, seeking cancellation of 14 claims as anticipated or obvious over several fiber‑optic monitoring references. The petition relies on §§102 and 103 and an expert declaration.
patent · Aug 22, 2025
Porta Sophia v.Ellis, Greg
· IPR2025-01460
Porta Sophia petitions the PTAB to invalidate U.S. Patent 11,235,110 covering a vaporizer device for psychedelic compounds, asserting that the device, formulations, and isotopomer claims are fully anticipated or obvious by extensive prior‑art references.
patent · Aug 22, 2025
Topsoe, Inc. et al. v.CASALE SA
· IPR2025-01455
Topsoe petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑11 and 17‑19 of Casale’s ’168 patent covering ammonia synthesis from natural gas. The petition relies on anticipation and obviousness arguments using five prior‑art references. The Board has yet to decide whether to institute the review.
patent · Aug 22, 2025
Canadian Solar (USA) Inc. et al. v.First Solar, Inc.
· IPR2025-01432
Canadian Solar petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑8 of First Solar’s 9,130,074 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over multiple pre‑2008 publications describing SIPOS emitters, oxide layers, and antireflective coatings.
patent · Aug 22, 2025
SK hynix Inc. v.Advanced Memory Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-01449
SK hynix has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of five claims of U.S. Patent 8,593,888 covering flash‑memory voltage regulation, alleging anticipation and obviousness over prior patents such as Tomita, Im, Nam, and Nakayama.
patent · Aug 22, 2025
Topsoe, Inc. et al. v.CASALE SA
· IPR2025-01454
Topsoe has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑11 and 17‑19 of Casale’s U.S. Patent 11,286,168. The petition argues that the claims are anticipated or obvious over a collection of prior‑art references, especially a 2007 IFA presentation and several earlier patents. The Board must decide whether to institute the review.
patent instituted · Aug 22, 2025
Topsoe, Inc. et al. v.CASALE SA
· IPR2025-01454
The PTAB granted institution for the IPR involving Topsoe and CASALE regarding patent 11286168. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim.
patent denied · Aug 22, 2025
CYBERSECURE IPS, LLC et al. v.Network Integrity Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-01441
The USPTO Board denied institution for IPR2025-01441 after a merits review. The petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the challenged claims.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 21, 2025
Snap Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01345
Snap Inc. and Nokia Technologies have reached a settlement and jointly moved to terminate the IPR over Nokia’s 9,036,701 patent. The motion cites statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. §317 and emphasizes public policy benefits of settlement.
patent · Aug 21, 2025
Snap Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01345
Hisense USA and Nokia Technologies have settled the IPR on Nokia's U.S. Patent No. 9,036,701 and jointly request the Board to keep the settlement agreement confidential and terminate the proceeding as to Hisense.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 21, 2025
Snap Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01345
Hisense and Nokia have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,036,701 and jointly moved to terminate the pending inter partes review, citing statutory authority and public‑policy benefits of settlement.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 21, 2025
Snap Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01345
Snap Inc. and Nokia Technologies Oy have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,036,701 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding, requesting the settlement be kept confidential under statutory authority.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 21, 2025
Snap Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01345
Snap and Hisense settled their disputes with Nokia over patents 9,036,701 and 11,805,267. The Board granted joint motions to terminate, ending the IPRs before institution.
patent · Aug 21, 2025
Snap Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01345
Snap Inc. petitions the PTAB to invalidate Nokia’s ’701 video‑coding patent, asserting obviousness over Murashita, Marpe, and Yu. The petition targets all 20 claims and seeks their cancellation.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 20, 2025
MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
· IPR2025-01384
MWE Investments and Champion Power Equipment settled their IPR over U.S. Patent 11,905,895 and jointly requested that the settlement be kept confidential under 35 U.S.C. §317(b). The petition seeks withdrawal from the proceeding and confidentiality for the agreement.
patent · Aug 20, 2025
MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
· IPR2025-01384
MWE Investments, Harbor Freight Tools, and Generac, together with Champion Power Equipment, filed a joint request asking the PTAB to keep the settlement agreement (Exhibit 1300) confidential and separate from the IPR file. The request cites statutory confidentiality provisions.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 20, 2025
MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
· IPR2025-01384
The PTAB granted settlement motions, terminating the IPRs against Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. and MWE Investments, LLC, while keeping the settlement agreements confidential. Generac Power Systems remains as the sole petitioner in the related IPRs.
patent · Aug 20, 2025
MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
· IPR2025-01384
Petitioners seek IPR cancellation of all 21 claims of Champion’s dual‑fuel lockout switch patent, arguing obviousness over DuroMax, Elsdon, Parlatore, Hallberg and a lack of structural support for key claim terms.
patent · Aug 20, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.
· IPR2025-01054
TSMC has filed an IPR petition challenging all 11 claims of Marlin’s FinFET patent, asserting obviousness over six prior‑art references. The petition details five statutory grounds under 35 U.S.C. §103.
patent denied · Aug 20, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.
· IPR2025-01054
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR challenge brought by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. against Marlin Semiconductor Ltd., finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the merits.
patent denied · Aug 19, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC
· IPR2025-01334
Google’s petition to invalidate Dialect’s speech‑interface patent was denied. The Board concluded the petitioner did not show a reasonable likelihood of success on any of the asserted obviousness grounds.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 19, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC
· IPR2025-01334
Meta Platforms and Dialect have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 7,398,209. The parties filed a joint motion to stay all deadlines while they finalize the settlement and prepare dismissal filings.
patent · Aug 19, 2025
Voltage, LLC et al. v.Shoals Technologies Group, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-01443
Voltage, LLC has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Shoals Technologies’ U.S. Patent 12,015,375 covering photovoltaic lead assemblies. The petition alleges obviousness over Machida and combinations with Solon and Kim, and asks the Board to adopt ITC claim constructions.
patent · Aug 19, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC
· IPR2025-01334
Meta Platforms petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1,4,6‑9 of U.S. Patent 7,398,209, alleging obviousness over multiple speech‑recognition and natural‑language prior arts. The petition lists five grounds invoking 35 U.S.C. § 103.
