US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 64 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Jul 15, 2025
Arla Foods amba v.Leprino Foods Company et al.
· IPR2025-01199
Arla Foods petitions the PTAB to invalidate Leprino Foods’ 11,825,860 patent covering denatured whey protein compositions, asserting anticipation and obviousness over several dairy‑protein references.
patent instituted · Jul 15, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-01302
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01302, allowing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. to challenge the patent held by Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC.
patent instituted · Jul 15, 2025
Arla Foods amba v.Leprino Foods Company et al.
· IPR2025-01199
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01199 involving Arla Foods amba and Leprino Foods Company et al., allowing the challenger to proceed with challenging patent 11825860.
patent terminated or settled · Jul 14, 2025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC
· IPR2025-01289
Samsung and Radian Memory Systems settled their IPR disputes before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate, ending the proceedings and keeping the settlement documents confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Jul 14, 2025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC
· IPR2025-01289
Samsung and Radian Memory Systems have filed a joint motion to terminate IPR2025-01289 after reaching a confidential settlement. The motion cites public policy and efficiency reasons for early termination.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Fresenius Kabi SwissBioSim GmbH et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
· IPR2025-01268
Regeneron defends the PTAB’s discretionary denial of Fresenius’s request to review the denial of institution for an IPR targeting its aflibercept biosimilar patent. The response argues that Fresenius ignored the controlling Fintiv factors, misapplied settled‑expectations, and raised meritless constitutional claims.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Fresenius Kabi SwissBioSim GmbH et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
· IPR2025-01268
Fresenius Kabi seeks Director Review of a PTAB decision that denied institution of an IPR against Regeneron’s biosimilar patent. The petition argues the Board’s “settled expectations” rule and discretionary denial are unlawful and harm drug‑price competition.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Fresenius Kabi SwissBioSim GmbH et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
· IPR2025-01268
Court decision.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
GE Healthcare Ltd. et al. v.The Johns Hopkins University et al.
· PGR2025-00059
GE Healthcare petitions to invalidate Johns Hopkins' U.S. Patent 12,115,233 covering FAP‑targeting radiopharmaceuticals, asserting obviousness, lack of written description, and lack of enablement.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Dell Technologies Inc. et al. v.Cloud Byte LLC
· IPR2025-01284
Dell Technologies and Dell Inc. have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 27 claims of Cloud Byte’s ’249 patent covering packet‑forwarding nodes. The petition relies on the Shimizu patent application and the BGP‑4 standard (RFC‑4271) as prior art to argue obviousness.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Dell Technologies Inc. et al. v.Cloud Byte LLC
· IPR2025-01287
Dell Technologies petitions the PTAB to invalidate eight claims of Cloud Byte’s cooling‑structure patent, asserting obviousness over a suite of prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution of inter‑ partes review and cancellation of the claims.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-01276
Niantic filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of ImagineAR’s U.S. Patent 12,070,691 covering location‑based virtual gameplay. The petition relies on obviousness over the Kolo and Zyda publications under 35 U.S.C. §103.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Dell Technologies Inc. et al. v.Cloud Byte LLC
· IPR2025-01286
Dell Technologies has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate nine claims of Cloud Byte’s ‘632 patent covering server‑cooling abnormality detection. The petition relies on the combination of two prior‑art references, Hira and Shiga, to argue obviousness.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-01275
Niantic has filed an IPR petition challenging all 28 claims of ImagineAR’s U.S. Patent 11,484,797, asserting obviousness over the Kolo and Zyda publications.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Fresenius Kabi SwissBioSim GmbH et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
· IPR2025-01268
Fresenius Kabi SwissBioSim petitions the PTAB to invalidate Regeneron’s anti‑VEGF eye‑drug patent, asserting that the Dix ’226 reference anticipates all challenged claims and that the patent owner has not shown any criticality for the claimed formulation parameters.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Google LLC v.SoundClear Technologies LLC et al.
· IPR2025-01177
Google has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate SoundClear’s 11,244,675 patent covering voice‑controlled content generation. The petition asserts obviousness over Raitio/Fahlman and Ocampo/Fahlman combinations for claims 1‑7.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Dell Technologies Inc. et al. v.Cloud Byte LLC
· IPR2025-01288
Dell Technologies and Dell Inc. have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Cloud Byte's U.S. Patent 9,651,320 covering server‑cooling fan control. The petition relies on a combination of prior art (Sato, Nakamura, Jin) to argue obviousness under §103.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC
· IPR2025-01289
Samsung Electronics has filed an IPR petition challenging all 30 claims of Radian's ’614 SSD storage patent, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition seeks cancellation of the entire patent under 35 U.S.C. §311.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-01274
Niantic has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 28 claims of ImagineAR’s U.S. Patent 10,946,284. The challenger relies on the Kolo and Zyda publications to argue lack of novelty and obviousness under §§102 and 103.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Dell Technologies Inc. et al. v.Cloud Byte LLC
· IPR2025-01285
Dell Technologies has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 20 claims of Cloud Byte’s ’177 patent covering network flow tracing. The petition relies on obviousness over Rijhsinghani and combinations with RFC‑5474, Lean, and a networking textbook.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-01273
Niantic has filed an IPR petition challenging all 28 claims of ImagineAR’s U.S. Patent No. 11,666,827, which covers location‑based virtual gameplay. The challenger asserts that the claims are obvious over the Kolo and Zyda references under 35 U.S.C. §103 and seeks cancellation of the entire patent.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Fresenius Kabi SwissBiosim, GmbH et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
· IPR2025-01269
Fresenius Kabi SwissBiosim petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑11 of Regeneron’s aflibercept eye‑drug patent, arguing anticipation and obviousness based on earlier clinical studies and publications.
patent · Jul 14, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.W&Wsens Devices Inc.
· IPR2025-00997
Samsung has filed a petition for inter partes review seeking to invalidate 20 claims of W&Wsens Devices’ ’084 patent covering a microstructure‑enhanced photodetector integrated with a processor. The petition relies on Harada, Hasegawa, NXP and Yahaya references to argue obviousness. The Board has not yet ruled on institution.
patent instituted · Jul 14, 2025
GE Healthcare Ltd. et al. v.The Johns Hopkins University et al.
· PGR2025-00059
GE Healthcare Ltd.'s Post-Grant Review petition against The Johns Hopkins University was instituted by the PTAB, focusing on obviousness and statutory defects. The Board acknowledged strong arguments regarding combining prior art (US-633/Meletta with Jansen) and potential lack of enablement for radiopharmaceutical claims.
