US PTAB IP Litigation

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jul 25, 2025

Samsung successfully challenged Maxell’s ’086 patent, leading the PTAB to find all asserted claims unpatentable as obvious. The Board relied on a combination of prior‑art references covering touch‑screen input methods.

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

The PTAB held that Samsung’s challenge to Maxell’s 10,176,848 patent succeeded. All seven challenged claims—including those covering face‑recognition‑based chapter selection and a recording‑reproducing mode—were found obvious over Nozaki, Haitani, Graham and Kim.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC

· IPR2025-01211

TSMC has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 27 claims of a dual‑damascene interconnect patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition lists detailed grounds for each claim group and requests the Board to institute the review.

Guardant Health, Inc. v.Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

· IPR2025-01353

Guardant Health petitions the PTAB to invalidate Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory’s ’510 DNA‑sequencing patent, asserting that all challenged claims are obvious over the Lo application and other prior‑art references. The petition lists six grounds covering 30 claims and seeks cancellation of the entire patent.

Google LLC v.Telcom Ventures LLC

· IPR2025-01349

Google has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 14 claims of Telcom Ventures' smartphone payment patent, alleging obviousness over four prior art references.

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC

· IPR2025-01332

Meta Platforms has filed a petition to invalidate Dialect’s 8,447,607 patent covering multimodal speech processing. The challenger relies on Maes, Coffman and Ittycheriah references to argue obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103 and urges the Board to institute the IPR.

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC

· IPR2025-01333

Meta Platforms petitions the PTAB to invalidate Dialect’s 9,263,039 patent covering multimodal speech processing, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior patents Maes and Ross.

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

Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 13 claims of Maxell’s U.S. Patent 11,026,088, alleging obviousness over a suite of prior‑art references covering wireless LAN permission and connection management.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC

· IPR2025-01211

TSMC has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 21 claims of the ’623 patent, arguing that dummy‑via and dual‑damascene features were anticipated or obvious over multiple prior‑art references. The petition lists detailed grounds under §§102 and 103 and requests the Board to institute the review.

CrowdStrike, Inc. v.Skysong Innovations, LLC

· IPR2025-01170

CrowdStrike has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of Skysong Innovations’ ’897 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references covering machine‑learning‑based exploit prediction.

Guardant Health, Inc. v.Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

· IPR2025-01355

Guardant Health petitions the PTAB to invalidate 18 claims of Cold Spring Harbor’s ’589 patent covering DNA‑tagging methods for copy‑number analysis, asserting the claims are obvious over Lo and other prior art. The petition seeks cancellation of the entire patent.

patent denied · Jul 25, 2025

Hisense USA Corporation et al. v.VideoLabs, Inc.

· IPR2025-01329

Hisense has filed a petition to invalidate VideoLabs' 2010 picture coding patent, asserting that the sole claim is obvious over a 2002 Nokia (Karczewicz) publication combined with H.324 and H.263 standards. The petition seeks institution of an IPR and cancellation of claim 1.

Guardant Health, Inc. v.Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

· IPR2025-01355

The PTAB denied Guardant Health's IPR challenge against Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory's patent, finding the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any challenged claims.

patent denied · Jul 25, 2025

Guardant Health, Inc. v.Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

· IPR2025-01353

The USPTO Board denied the institution of an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition. The denial was based on a review of the merits, finding that the petitioner could not demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.

patent instituted · Jul 25, 2025

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

The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01307 involving Samsung Electronic Co. Ltd. and Maxell, LTD., finding the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.

Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC

Ford’s IPR petition for patent 9,020,697 faces a director‑review brief from AutoConnect arguing that Ford’s contradictory indefiniteness positions warrant denial of institution.

Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC

Court decision.

Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC

patent denied · Jul 24, 2025

AutoConnect Holdings seeks Director review of a PTAB decision that granted institution based on Ford’s supplier‑based settled‑expectations argument. The patent owner contends the factual basis is unsupported and asks for denial of institution.

Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC

Ford Motor Company filed a response urging the PTAB Director to deny AutoConnect Holdings’ request for review of a prior discretionary denial. Ford relies on long‑standing settled expectations from its relationship with Flextronics and AutoConnect’s lapse of maintenance fees to argue the request should be denied.

Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC

Ford Motor Company has filed an IPR petition challenging AutoConnect’s 9,020,697 patent covering vehicle‑network access based on device location. The petition asserts that all 21 claims are obvious over three prior‑art references (Clement, Ghabra, Lickfelt) and provides claim constructions. The Board is asked to institute the review.

Google LLC v.CardWare Inc.

· IPR2025-01344

Google has filed an IPR petition challenging all 23 claims of CardWare’s ’579 patent covering limited‑duration numbers for contactless payments. The petition asserts obviousness over a suite of prior‑art NFC payment references and argues that discretionary denial is unwarranted.

Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC

Ford Motor Co. petitions the PTAB to invalidate 21 claims of AutoConnect’s vehicle‑access patent, asserting that the invention was obvious over three prior‑art references (Clement, Ghabra, Lickfelt). The petition includes claim‑construction arguments and seeks institution of the IPR.

patent instituted · Jul 24, 2025

Apple Inc v.1LSS Inc.

· IPR2025-01180

Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging all 11 claims of 1LSS’s magnetic‑wallet patent, asserting that the invention is obvious over a suite of prior‑art references. The petition relies heavily on the Board’s earlier findings and detailed claim‑by‑claim analysis.

Ford Motor Company v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC