US PTAB IP Litigation
5,620 annotated decisions
Page 77 of 235 · 5,620 total
patent terminated or settled · Mar 31, 2025
Valneva Austria GMBH v.Takeda Vaccines, Inc.
· IPR2025-00776
Valneva Austria and Takeda Vaccines jointly moved to terminate an IPR covering 67 vaccine‑related claims. The Board granted the motion, dismissing the petition without a merits decision.
patent · Mar 31, 2025
United Services Automobile Association v.Auto Telematics Ltd.
· IPR2025-00812
Auto Telematics Ltd. has filed a Request for Director Review challenging the PTAB’s institution of an IPR against its vehicle‑telematics patent, arguing the Board misinterpreted claim language and ignored discretionary denial grounds.
patent · Mar 31, 2025
Valneva Austria GMBH v.Takeda Vaccines, Inc.
· IPR2025-00776
Valneva has filed an IPR petition challenging all 67 claims of Takeda’s Zika vaccine patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petitioner argues the examiner erred and that no discretionary bars apply, seeking cancellation of the entire patent.
patent · Mar 31, 2025
Microsoft Corporation v.TS-Optics Corporation
· IPR2025-00767
Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging TS‑Optics’ U.S. Patent 7,266,055 covering optical pickup actuators. The petition asserts that all asserted claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art references, including Choi, Ogata, Ikeda, Kamata, Santo, Kabasawa, Miura, and Sugiyama. Microsoft seeks institution of the IPR and cancellation of the claims.
patent instituted · Mar 31, 2025
United Services Automobile Association v.Auto Telematics Ltd.
· IPR2025-00812
USAA successfully petitioned to institute IPR proceedings against Auto Telematics Ltd.'s patent covering driver behavior monitoring and accident detection technology. The Board found the claims were reasonably likely to be obvious over combinations of prior art references, moving the case toward trial.
patent instituted · Mar 31, 2025
Valneva Austria GMBH v.Takeda Vaccines, Inc.
· IPR2025-00776
Valneva Austria GMBH successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Takeda Vaccines regarding a vaccine patent. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that several claims are unpatentable over combinations of prior art, specifically citing evidence related to fetal protection and antibody transfer.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00039
Merck’s petition reply contends that Halozyme’s hyaluronidase enzyme patent fails the written‑description and enablement requirements of 35 U.S.C. §112(a). The company argues the disclosed genus is too broad and impossible to enable without undue experimentation.
patent denied · Mar 28, 2025
Henri Daussi, LLC v.ECNA, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-00807
The PTAB denied Henri Daussi, LLC's motion to withdraw its IPR petition against ECNA, LLC's patent 9,398,791, while allowing the parties to file a joint motion to terminate the proceeding after settling.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
Henri Daussi, LLC v.ECNA, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-00807
Henri Daussi, LLC filed an unopposed motion to withdraw its IPR petition after reaching a settlement with patent owner ECNA, LLC. The Board has not yet issued an institution decision, and the parties seek termination of the proceeding.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
Intel Corporation v.Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-00795
Intel filed a request for rehearing after the PTAB Director denied institution of IPR2025‑00795, arguing that a recent $8.9 billion U.S. government investment makes its Xeon processors vital to national security. The petition contends the Director misapprehended the briefing and seeks referral to a merits panel.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 28, 2025
Henri Daussi, LLC v.ECNA, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-00807
The PTAB granted the parties’ joint request to keep their settlement agreement confidential after the IPR was terminated by mutual agreement.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 28, 2025
Henri Daussi, LLC v.ECNA, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-00807
Henri Daussi, LLC and ECNA, LLC settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,398,791 B1 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review before the Board instituted the trial. The Board granted the motion, dismissing the petition.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 28, 2025
Henri Daussi, LLC v.ECNA, LLC et al.
· IPR2025-00807
Henri Daussi, LLC and ECNA, LLC filed a joint motion to terminate IPR2025-00807 after reaching a settlement, ending the Board proceeding without a final written decision.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 28, 2025
Intel Corporation v.Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-00795
NVIDIA and Advanced Cluster Systems settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,676,877 B2 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The PTAB granted the motion, ending the proceeding without a merits decision.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 28, 2025
Intel Corporation v.Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-00794
NVIDIA and Advanced Cluster Systems jointly moved to terminate IPR2020-01608 concerning patent 8,082,289 B2 after the Board had instituted the review. The Board granted the motion, ending the proceeding without a final written decision.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
Intel Corporation v.Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-00795
The USPTO denied Intel’s request for rehearing of the Director’s discretionary denial and the denial of institution in IPR2025‑00795, leaving the original decision intact.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-00682
An email from the PTAB Director informs the parties that Director Review requests have been received for IPR2025-00682 and IPR2025-00683, outlining a 15‑page, five‑day response window and prohibiting new evidence.
patent terminated or settled · Mar 28, 2025
Intel Corporation v.Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-00795
NVIDIA and Advanced Cluster Systems settled their dispute over U.S. Patent No. 8,140,612 B2, leading to a joint motion that terminated the inter partes review after it had been instituted.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
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 · Mar 28, 2025
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 · Mar 28, 2025
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 · Mar 28, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-00682
Court decision.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
· IPR2025-00682
Court decision.
patent · Mar 28, 2025
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v.Halozyme, Inc. et al.
· PGR2025-00039
Merck has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,104,185 covering modified PH20 hyaluronidase proteins. The petition argues the claims are overly broad, lack written description and enablement, and are obvious in view of prior art. The case is pending institution.
