US PTAB IP Litigation

Fortinet, Inc. v.Netskope, Inc.

· IPR2026-00025

Fortinet has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of Netskope's U.S. Patent 8,117,639 covering network access control. The petition relies on Richmond, Wood, and Teraslinna as anticipatory and obviousness prior art.

NIUM PTE. LTD. v.Intercurrency Software LLC

· IPR2025-01586

NIUM PTE. LTD. has filed a petition for inter partes review seeking to invalidate all 16 claims of Intercurrency Software’s ’701 patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art trading system disclosures.

GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

· IPR2025-01457

Generac and co‑petitioners have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 16 claims of Champion’s ’145 dual‑fuel generator patent, alleging obviousness over a suite of prior‑art engine manuals and patents.

Fortinet, Inc. v.Netskope, Inc.

· IPR2026-00026

Fortinet has filed an IPR petition challenging Netskope's U.S. Patent 8,327,426, which covers federated single‑sign‑on methods. The petitioner alleges lack of novelty and obviousness based on the Hinton and Burch prior‑art references, seeking cancellation of all thirteen claims.

Fortinet, Inc. v.Netskope, Inc.

· IPR2026-00027

Fortinet has petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against Netskope’s 7,593,936 patent, asserting that all 22 claims are anticipated or obvious over Honig, Oliphant, and Vinberg. The petition seeks cancellation of the entire claim set.

patent instituted · Jul 10, 2025

American Airlines et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC

· IPR2025-01510

American Airlines and Southwest Airlines have filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 21 claims of Intellectual Ventures' 802.11 dual‑mode communication patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.

GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

· IPR2025-01457

The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01457 after reviewing the petitioner's likelihood of prevailing. This allows the case to move forward to a merits trial.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex plc and Credo Technology Group Ltd. have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,032,111 and jointly request that the settlement agreement be kept confidential and the proceeding terminated.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

· IPR2025-01386

Volex plc and Credo Technology Group have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent No. 11,012,252 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board is asked to dismiss the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

· IPR2025-01386

Volex plc and Credo Technology Group have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,012,252 and jointly request that the settlement be kept confidential and the proceeding terminated.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex plc and Credo Technology Group have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent No. 10,877,233 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board is asked to dismiss the proceeding under statutory authority.

Microsoft Corporation v.Dialect, LLC

Microsoft and Dialect settled their IPR dispute over patent 7,398,209 before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate, keeping the settlement agreement confidential.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex plc and Credo Technology Group settled their IPR disputes covering three patents, filing a joint motion that led the PTAB to terminate the proceedings before a trial was instituted.

Microsoft Corporation v.Dialect, LLC

Microsoft and Dialect have jointly moved to keep their settlement agreement confidential, invoking statutory provisions for business‑confidential information.

Microsoft Corporation v.Dialect, LLC

patent denied · Jul 8, 2025

A 2024 study of PTAB final written decisions from 2021 shows that patents invalidated in IPRs often have extensive prior‑art citations and that most unpatentability grounds depend on new prior art introduced during the proceeding, with expert testimony frequently influencing outcomes.

Microsoft Corporation v.Dialect, LLC

patent denied · Jul 8, 2025

Google LLC’s petition to invalidate Dialect’s 7,398,209 patent on speech‑interface technology was denied. The Board concluded the petitioner did not show a reasonable likelihood of success on any of its obviousness arguments.

Microsoft Corporation v.Dialect, LLC

The USPTO denied Microsoft’s request to institute an Inter Partes Review of Dialect’s patents, citing the patents’ long‑standing ownership and a parallel district‑court case. No trial will proceed.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex and Credo settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 10,877,233 and jointly filed a motion to keep the settlement confidential and terminate the proceeding.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

· IPR2025-01386

Volex PLC and Credo Technology Group settled their IPR disputes covering three patents, including U.S. Patent 11,012,252, and jointly moved to terminate the proceedings. The Board granted the termination and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex plc and Credo Technology Group have reached a settlement and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 11,032,111. The motion cites statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. § 317 and emphasizes that no merits decision has been rendered.

Microsoft Corporation v.Dialect, LLC

Microsoft and Dialect, LLC jointly moved to terminate IPR 2025-01351 before institution, citing a settlement that resolves all disputes. The Board has not yet made an institution decision, and the parties seek confidentiality for the agreement.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex and Credo Technology Group settled their IPR disputes, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceedings before trial and keep the settlement confidential.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Credo’s ’233 active‑cable patent, arguing the claims are obvious over prior‑art patents Lugthart‑706, Gorecki‑617 and the IEEE 802.3‑2015 Ethernet standard.

Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.