US PTAB IP Litigation

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.

· IPR2025-01164

Samsung Electronics has filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent 12,004,262, asserting that its four claims are obvious over several IEEE 802.11 draft and standard documents, as well as the Yang publication. The petition seeks institution of the IPR and cancellation of all claims.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.DivX, LLC

· IPR2025-01222

Amazon has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of DivX’s 10,412,141 patent covering progressive video playback. The petition asserts that all 30 claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references (Hagai, Li, Park, Schmitz) and general POSITA knowledge.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.DivX, LLC

· IPR2025-01223

Amazon has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 17 claims of DivX’s adaptive bitrate streaming patent, asserting obviousness over Ozer, Liao, Gu, and Ronca. The petition requests the Board to institute review under 35 U.S.C. §103.

patent denied · Jun 30, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Advanced Coding Technologies LLC

· IPR2025-01221

Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑9 of Advanced Coding Technologies' 2010 voice‑coding patent, arguing the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references.

Apple Inc. v.Advanced Coding Technologies LLC

· IPR2025-01221

The USPTO Board denied institution of multiple IPRs, including the proceeding involving Apple Inc. and Advanced Coding Technologies LLC.

patent instituted · Jun 30, 2025

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.

· IPR2025-01164

The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01164, allowing Samsung to proceed against Wilus regarding patent 12004262. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.

patent terminated or settled · Jun 27, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Vampire Labs, LLC

Apple and Vampire Labs have reached a settlement that resolves all disputes over U.S. Patent 8,358,103, and they have jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR.

CentralSquare Technologies, LLC v.Carbyne, Ltd. et al.

patent terminated or settled · Jun 27, 2025

CentralSquare (CST) opposes Carbyne’s request for a good‑cause extension to seek Director Review in IPR2025‑01179, asserting the deadline was missed intentionally and no claim‑construction conflict exists. The email urges the Director to deny the contingent request.

Apple Inc. v.Vampire Labs, LLC

Apple and Vampire Labs reached a settlement, prompting a joint motion that led the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review of patent 8,358,103. The Board granted the termination without addressing the merits.

Apple Inc. v.Vampire Labs, LLC

patent denied · Jun 27, 2025

Apple and Vampire Labs filed a joint motion asking the PTAB to treat their settlement agreement as business‑confidential and to terminate the IPR.

CentralSquare Technologies, LLC v.Carbyne, Ltd. et al.

The USPTO denied Carbyne’s request for an extension to file a Director Review, finding no good cause and citing Revvo precedent. CentralSquare’s claim‑construction positions were already known before the deadline.

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.

· PGR2025-00052

Merck has filed a post‑grant review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,264,345, which claims thousands of modified PH20 hyaluronidase polypeptides. The petition alleges lack of written description, enablement, indefiniteness, and obviousness. The Board must decide whether to institute the proceeding.

Apple Inc. v.Vampire Labs, LLC

Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging all 14 claims of Vampire Labs' battery‑charging patent, arguing that the claims are obvious over prior art (Stephens, Horowitz, and Toya) and that discretionary denial is unwarranted. The petition seeks institution of the proceeding and cancellation of the claims.

Apple Inc. v.CardWare Inc.

· IPR2025-01147

Apple Inc. has filed a petition for inter partes review of CardWare’s U.S. Patent 10,628,820, asserting that all 20 claims are obvious over a range of prior‑art references. The petition highlights lack of patentable weight for printed‑matter limitations and argues a POSITA would have been motivated to combine the teachings.

Aerin Medical Inc. v.Neurent Medical Ltd. et al.

· IPR2025-01127

Aerin Medical seeks IPR cancellation of Neurent’s ’974 nasal neuromodulation patent, asserting that all 20 claims are obvious over Townley, Wolf‑003/Wolf‑290, and the Angeles console.

CentralSquare Technologies, LLC v.Carbyne, Ltd. et al.

patent instituted · Jun 27, 2025

CentralSquare Technologies petitions the PTAB to invalidate all 20 claims of Carbyne’s emergency video‑streaming patent, arguing they are anticipated or obvious over two earlier patents. The petition seeks institution of an IPR under §§102 and 103.

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.

· PGR2025-00052

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC successfully petitioned the PTAB to invalidate Halozyme, Inc.'s claims covering a genus of modified PH20 polypeptides. The Board found that the broad scope of the claimed variants lacked adequate written description and enablement support in the original patent disclosure. This decision significantly challenges the breadth of the patented technology in hyaluronidase drug development.

patent instituted · Jun 27, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Vampire Labs, LLC

patent instituted · Jun 27, 2025

The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01215, allowing Apple Inc. to challenge Vampire Labs' patent 8358103.

CentralSquare Technologies, LLC v.Carbyne, Ltd. et al.