US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 77 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · Jun 13, 2025
Element TV Company, LP et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
· IPR2025-01108
Element TV has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Nokia’s ’808 video‑coding patent. The challenge relies on obviousness over the Karczewicz publication and the MPEG‑1/H.263 standards. The petition adopts prior Board constructions from an earlier Amazon IPR.
patent denied · Jun 13, 2025
Google LLC v.Valtrus Innovations Limited et al.
· IPR2025-01157
The USPTO Board denied institution for multiple IPR petitions, including one involving Google LLC and Valtrus Innovations Limited. No trial will proceed on these matters.
patent instituted · Jun 13, 2025
Solventum Corporation v.Wound Healing Technologies Corp.
· IPR2025-01042
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01042, allowing Solventum Corporation to challenge Wound Healing Technologies Corp.'s patent 10639404 after finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
patent instituted · Jun 13, 2025
ROBE lighting s.r.o. v.Guangzhou Haoyang Electronic Co., Ltd.
· IPR2025-01016
ROBE lighting s.r.o. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Guangzhou Haoyang Electronic Co., Ltd.'s patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness regarding light fixture sealing systems. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the '373 patent is unpatentable based on prior art reference Jurik.
patent · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00101
Meta Platforms seeks cancellation of all twenty claims of SitNet’s ’454 patent, asserting obviousness over Amidon and the Wong‑Gogic combination. The petition includes a supporting expert declaration and argues discretionary factors favor institution.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00100
Meta Platforms successfully challenged SitNet’s ’932 patent covering targeted advertising in situational networks. The PTAB found all ten claims (12‑21) unpatentable as obvious over Amidon, Walsh, Shahine, and Jones. The decision clears Meta’s path for its ad‑tech offerings.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00100
Meta Platforms successfully challenged SitNet’s ’682 patent covering situational networks. The PTAB found all twenty claims unpatentable as obvious over prior art. The decision finalizes the IPR with a sweeping cancellation.
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00101
Meta Platforms successfully challenged SitNet’s ’932 patent, with the PTAB finding all ten challenged claims unpatentable as obvious over Amidon, Walsh, Shahine and Jones. The Board affirmed the petitioner’s arguments and declined to construe the term “event node.”
patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00101
The PTAB held that Meta Platforms' petition proved all 20 claims of SitNet’s ’682 patent obvious over Burfeind and Crowley, rendering the claims unpatentable.
patent · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00100
Meta Platforms petitions the PTAB to invalidate all 16 claims of SitNet’s ’345 patent, arguing they are obvious over Gage, Mitchell, Shida, and Sinha. The petition emphasizes strong discretionary factors favoring institution.
patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00100
Meta Platforms successfully challenged SitNet’s ’454 patent, leading the PTAB to find claims 1‑9 and 20 unpatentable and cancel claims 10‑19.
patent · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00100
Meta Platforms petitions the PTAB to invalidate SitNet’s ’290 patent, asserting that all fourteen claims are obvious over six prior‑art references previously used in IPR2024‑00530.
patent · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00101
Meta Platforms has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 18 claims of SitNet’s U.S. Patent 12,245,325. The petition argues that the claims are obvious over two prior‑art groupings—Amidon‑Issa and Wong‑Gogic‑Kraft—citing earlier IPR decisions that invalidated a related ’454 patent.
patent · Jun 11, 2025
Avidbots Corporation et al. v.Brain Corporation
· IPR2025-01603
Avidbots has filed an IPR petition against Brain Corporation’s 10,823,576 patent, asserting that all 36 claims are anticipated by earlier SLAM publications and obvious when combined with other robot‑mapping references.
patent denied · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00101
The PTAB denied the institution of IPR2026-00101 against SitNet's patent 12245325. The denial was based on Meta Platforms failing to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
patent instituted · Jun 11, 2025
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC
· IPR2026-00100
The USPTO Director issued a partial Institution Decision for multiple IPRs, granting review in five proceedings while denying it in four others based on the likelihood of prevailing.
patent · Jun 10, 2025
INTELLIGENT PROTECTION MANAGEMENT CORP. v.Cisco Technology, Inc., et al.
· IPR2025-01588
Intelligent Protection Management Corp. has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Cisco’s ’293 video‑superposition patent, arguing they are obvious over the Tysso system and a GIMP user manual. The petition cites detailed expert testimony and prior‑art references to support the unpatentability argument.
patent · Jun 10, 2025
Liberty Energy Inc. et al. v.U.S. WELL SERVICES, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-01539
Liberty Energy has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of U.S. Patent 11,668,420, asserting obviousness over multiple hydraulic fracturing references. The petition seeks institution of the review and cancellation of the claims under 35 U.S.C. §103.
patent denied · Jun 10, 2025
INTELLIGENT PROTECTION MANAGEMENT CORP. v.Cisco Technology, Inc., et al.
· IPR2025-01588
The USPTO Board denied institution for IPR2025-01588 after reviewing the merits, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
patent · Jun 8, 2025
Google LLC v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01389
Google petitions an IPR to invalidate 16 claims of Telcom Ventures' 11,937,172 patent covering smartphone NFC financial transactions, asserting obviousness over Barnett, Waters, White, and Smith. The petition also challenges any discretionary denial and seeks institution of the review.
patent · Jun 6, 2025
Geotab Inc. et al. v.Fractus, S.A.
· IPR2025-01027
Geotab petitions the PTAB to invalidate Fractus’s 11,349,200 antenna‑design patent, asserting obviousness over Dou and Jing and lack of written description for 4G‑standard claims.
patent · Jun 6, 2025
Geotab Inc. et al. v.Fractus, S.A.
· IPR2025-01026
Geotab seeks to invalidate all 20 claims of Fractus’s ’677 antenna patent, arguing obviousness over prior‑art antennas and lack of written‑description support for 4G LTE features. The petition urges the Board to institute review and cancel the claims.
patent · Jun 6, 2025
UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY et al. v.MES, Inc.
· IPR2025-01118
BirchTech (MES, Inc.) opposes Union Electric’s request for Director Review of a denied institution of an IPR covering a mercury‑control patent. The response argues the Director’s decision is final, the patent’s litigation history does not merit reversal, and procedural requests for joinder and stay are untimely.
patent · Jun 6, 2025
UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY et al. v.MES, Inc.
· IPR2025-01118
Union Electric seeks Director Review to overturn a discretionary denial of its IPR petition challenging MES’s mercury‑control patent, arguing the patent is invalid on multiple grounds.
