US PTAB IP Litigation

DraftKings Inc. et al. v.WinView IP Holdings, LLC

· IPR2026-00175

DraftKings has filed an IPR petition to invalidate 16 claims of a fantasy‑sports patent owned by WinView IP Holdings, asserting that the invention is already disclosed in earlier patents and publications.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.

· IPR2026-00220

TSMC filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 8,076,735, asserting that all six claims are anticipated or obvious over prior art references Chuang, Lin, and Brask. The petition seeks cancellation of the claims.

Medtronic, Inc. v.Moskowitz Family LLC

· IPR2026-00217

Medtronic has filed an IPR petition challenging 16 claims of Moskowitz Family’s spinal fusion patent, asserting that Palmatier anticipates the invention and that combined references render the remaining claims obvious.

patent terminated or settled · Jan 15, 2026

Medtronic, Inc. v.Moskowitz Family LLC

· IPR2026-00216

Medtronic has filed an IPR petition challenging 16 claims of the ’284 spinal fusion patent owned by Moskowitz Family. The challenger relies on Palmatier, Gordon and Glerum as prior art to argue anticipation and obviousness.

Plaid Inc. v.Secure Authentication Technologies LLC et al.

· IPR2026-00157

Plaid Inc. and Secure Authentication Technologies LLC jointly moved to terminate IPR 2026-00157 after a Utah district court invalidated the patent, citing 35 U.S.C. §317.

patent denied · Jan 15, 2026

Google LLC et al. v.HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

· IPR2026-00137

The PTAB, in a Director Review, denied institution of Samsung's inter partes review against Headwater's patent, citing the timing of a parallel court proceeding as a decisive discretionary factor.

patent denied · Jan 15, 2026

Google LLC et al. v.HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

· IPR2026-00138

The Director Review denied institution of two IPRs against Headwater Research, finding that discretionary factors—particularly the timing of a parallel proceeding—outweighed the petitioner's merits. Samsung Electronics (as petitioner) and Headwater Research presented opposing arguments on the strength of the petition and the proper weighing of Fintiv factors.

patent denied · Jan 15, 2026

Google LLC et al. v.HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

· IPR2026-00137

The PTAB Director Review denied institution of the IPRs against Headwater Research’s patents, finding the parallel proceeding’s trial date too close to the expected final decision.

patent · Jan 15, 2026

Google LLC et al. v.HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

· IPR2026-00138

Google has filed a petition to institute an IPR against Headwater Research’s U.S. Patent 9,609,544, seeking cancellation of all 23 claims on the basis that they are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petition relies on a combination of prior‑art references covering network policy and power‑management techniques.

patent · Jan 15, 2026

Plaid Inc. v.Secure Authentication Technologies LLC et al.

· IPR2026-00157

Plaid Inc. has filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 11,315,090, asserting that its ten claims on automated multi‑factor authentication are anticipated or obvious over earlier patents and public disclosures.

patent · Jan 15, 2026

Google LLC et al. v.HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

· IPR2026-00137

Google LLC filed a petition to institute an IPR against Headwater Research’s 9,647,918 patent, asserting that all 19 claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references. The petition seeks cancellation of the entire claim set.

patent · Jan 14, 2026

Microsoft Corporation v.Qomplx LLC

· IPR2026-00183

Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging claims 1 and 4 of Qomplx’s 2022 cloud‑telemetry patent, asserting obviousness over prior‑art references describing virtual appliances and cloud agents. The petition seeks institution of the review.

patent terminated or settled · Jan 13, 2026

Paragon 28, Inc. v.TREACE MEDICAL CONCEPTS, INC.

· PGR2026-00022

Treace Medical and Fusion Orthopedics settled their patent and trademark lawsuit over bunion‑correction technology. The settlement was announced in a press release and filed as an exhibit in the PGR proceeding.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.

· IPR2026-00208

Cisco Systems filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Damaka's U.S. 9,578,092 patent covering modular video‑conferencing functionality. The petition relies on four prior‑art references to argue obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103 for claims 1‑30.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.

· IPR2026-00209

Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 20 claims of Damaka’s ’046 patent covering modular video‑conferencing software. The petition relies on four prior‑art references—Abuan, Ludwig, Lawson and Guzman—to argue obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103.

Paragon 28, Inc. v.TREACE MEDICAL CONCEPTS, INC.

· PGR2026-00022

Paragon 28, an affiliate of Zimmer Biomet, petitions the PTAB to invalidate all 30 claims of Treace’s ’481 bunion‑correction patent, asserting that the claimed methods are obvious over multiple prior‑art surgical references.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.

· IPR2026-00211

Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 55 claims of Damaka’s ’116 patent covering modular video‑conferencing software. The petition relies on obviousness grounds over prior‑art references such as Abuan, Eisenberg, Beilis, and Guzman.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.

· IPR2026-00210

Cisco has filed an IPR petition challenging Damaka's U.S. Pat. 11,930,362, which covers modular video‑conferencing software. The petition asserts obviousness over a combination of five prior‑art references and requests the Board to institute a trial and cancel claims 1‑28 and 75.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.

· IPR2026-00207

Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 28 claims of Damaka’s U.S. 9,270,744 patent covering modular video‑conferencing software. The petition relies on four prior‑art references to argue obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jan 9, 2026

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Damaka, Inc.

· IPR2026-00206

Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Damaka’s U.S. 9,027,032 patent covering modular video‑conferencing functionality. The petition relies on obviousness over four prior‑art references that disclose similar APIs, function blocks, and authentication mechanisms.

Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC

Google successfully challenged Secure Communication Technologies' proximity‑beacon patent, with the PTAB finding all eight claims unpatentable based on multiple prior‑art references.

patent · Jan 9, 2026

Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC

Google petitions the PTAB to invalidate Secure Communication Technologies' 8,385,913 patent, asserting that prior art Mgrdechian and related references anticipate or render obvious all challenged claims covering wireless device identifier exchange via a server.

patent · Jan 9, 2026

Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC

Google petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims of a mobile‑commerce patent, asserting anticipation by Perttila and obviousness over Perttila combined with Swartz. The petition seeks institution of review under §§102 and 103.

patent · Jan 9, 2026

Google LLC v.Secure Communication Technologies, LLC