US PTAB IP Litigation
8,574 annotated decisions
Page 65 of 358 · 8,574 total
patent
Revvo Technologies, Inc. v.Tire Stickers LLC et al.
· IPR2025-00631
Revvo Technologies files a response opposing Tire Stickers’ untimely Director Review request, arguing the Board has already institutioned the IPR and found no claim construction needed.
patent
Revvo Technologies, Inc. v.Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc.
· IPR2025-00632
Cerebrum Sensor Technologies files a Director Review petition to vacate the institution of an IPR against Revvo Technologies, alleging the petitioner’s inconsistent claim constructions and indefiniteness arguments violate the Director’s Tesla policy.
patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-00683
Statistical analysis of PTAB IPR decisions from 2020‑2025 shows an increase in rulings that find at least one claim unpatentable, driven by both §102 and §103 grounds.
patent
Revvo Technologies, Inc. v.Tire Stickers LLC et al.
· IPR2025-00631
Tire Stickers LLC requests Director Review to vacate the PTAB's institution of an IPR filed by Revvo Technologies, alleging the petitioner gave conflicting claim constructions in the Board and district court. The request cites recent Director decisions requiring explanation of such inconsistencies.
patent terminated or settled
USAA Federal Savings Bank v.PACid Technologies, LLC
· IPR2025-00697
USAA Federal Savings Bank and PACid Technologies settled their IPR dispute before trial, leading the PTAB to terminate IPR2025-00697 and related proceedings. The settlement was documented via a Joint Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice filed in federal court.
patent terminated or settled
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.KAIFI LLC
· IPR2025-00627
KAIFI and Amazon filed a joint motion stating they have settled the dispute and seek a 45‑day stay of court deadlines.
patent
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.OS - NEW HORIZON PERSONAL COMPUTING SOLUTIONS LTD.
· IPR2025-00613
Samsung Electronics seeks Director review of a PTAB decision that denied institution of an IPR against its life‑signs detector patent. The petition alleges examiner error, improper reliance on settled expectations, and due‑process violations. A stay of the parallel district‑court case is also argued.
patent
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
· IPR2025-00688
WEC Energy Group and Birchtech Corp have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,933,370, filing a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites settlement, lack of a merits decision, and public‑policy benefits of settlement.
patent terminated or settled
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.KAIFI LLC
· IPR2025-00624
KAIFI LLC and Amazon.com, Inc. jointly filed a motion to stay all court deadlines after reaching a settlement in principle. The parties seek a 45‑day stay to finalize the agreement and submit dismissal papers.
patent
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Audio Pod IP, LLC
· IPR2025-00768
Amazon has requested PTAB Director Review for six IPRs, including the dispute over Audio Pod IP's patent 10,805,111. The patent owner may respond within five business days, but cannot submit new evidence. The Director will determine whether to grant the review.
patent denied
Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd. et al. v.Stratasys, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-00611
The PTAB denied a petition for Director Review of the institution decision in IPR2025-00611, which upheld Stratasys’s 3D‑printing patent. The denial applies to three related IPRs as well.
patent terminated or settled
Alpinestars S.p.A et al. v.Dainese S.p.A.
· IPR2025-00750
This exhibit is a certified English translation of the settlement agreement between Dainese and Alpinestars dated Oct. 5, 2020, filed in IPR2025‑00750. It confirms the authenticity of the settlement for the Board’s record.
patent
Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd. et al. v.Stratasys, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-00611
Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology seeks denial of Stratasys' Director Review request, arguing the PTAB’s referral decision correctly applied the Fintiv factors and that a broad stipulation eliminates any need for duplicate litigation. The petition emphasizes that incorporation‑by‑reference arguments are irrelevant to institution.
patent
Kahoot! AS et al. v.interstellar inc.
· IPR2025-00696
Kahoot! filed a request for Director Review of the PTAB institution decision, arguing the filing is timely and requesting correction of the document type and fee payment assistance.
patent
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
· IPR2025-00717
A joint settlement between WEC Energy Group and BirchTech has prompted a motion to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent 10,926,218. The parties rely on 35 U.S.C. §317 to dismiss WEC from the proceeding before any merits decision. The Board must now decide whether to grant the termination.
patent denied
NVIDIA Corporation v.Lowenstein and Weatherwax LLP
· IPR2025-00610
The USPTO denied NVIDIA’s request for rehearing of the Director’s discretionary denial of institution in four IPRs, leaving the original denial in place.
patent
NVIDIA Corporation v.Neural AI, LLC
· IPR2025-00608
NVIDIA has filed a rehearing request challenging the PTAB Director’s denial of institution for its IPR against Neural AI’s GPU‑AI patent. The petitioner argues the Board ignored trial‑date timing data and the patent’s recent issuance, which should weigh against discretionary denial.
patent
NVIDIA Corporation v.Lowenstein and Weatherwax LLP
· IPR2025-00609
NVIDIA filed a rehearing request challenging the USPTO Director’s denial to institute an IPR on its GPU‑based neural‑network patent, arguing the Board ignored key timing and patent‑age evidence.
patent
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-00682
Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC submits an authorized response urging the Director to deny Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's request for Director Review of a discretionary denial to institute an IPR on patent 8,198,686. The response rebuts the petitioner’s arguments on national security, settled expectations, duplication, and examiner error.
patent denied
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-00682
The USPTO denied Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's request for Director Review of the institution denial in IPR2025-00682, leaving the earlier decision intact.
patent
GetTattle, Inc. v.AfterWords, Inc.
· IPR2025-00677
AfterWords, Inc. filed a preliminary response opposing GetTattle’s IPR petition, contending that the cited prior art does not disclose the patented Survey Module and therefore the petition should be denied.
patent
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-00682
TSMC seeks a Director Review to overturn a discretionary denial and have the PTAB evaluate the validity of its ‘686 semiconductor patent, citing national‑security stakes and examiner errors. The request stresses long‑standing settled expectations and a lack of prior enforcement.
patent
NVIDIA Corporation v.Neural AI, LLC
· IPR2025-00606
NVIDIA has filed a rehearing request challenging the PTAB Director’s denial to institute an IPR on its GPU‑related patent. The company contends the Board ignored time‑to‑trial statistics and the lack of commercialization, which should favor institution.
patent
Amgen Inc. et al. v.Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
· IPR2025-00601
Amgen petitions the PTAB to overturn a Director’s denial of institution for an IPR challenging Bristol‑Myers Squibb’s Opdivo dosing patent, arguing the denial misapplied settled‑expectations criteria and ignored European claim abandonments.
