US PTAB IP Litigation

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00227

The PTAB upheld the Director’s discretionary denial of institution in IPR2025-00227, finding the review inefficient and unnecessary after prior adjudication and a stipulation not to reassert the claims. Google’s petition for rehearing was rejected.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

RØDE Microphones and Freedman Electronics argue the PTAB correctly instituted an IPR against Zaxcom and that the Board’s discretion was not abused, urging denial of the Patent Owner’s Director Review request.

Arm Ltd et al. v.DAEDALUS PRIME LLC

· IPR2025-00207

Arm’s request for Director Review of a discretionary denial of institution was rejected. The Board found Arm lacked a concrete interest and the prior art cited was cumulative, supporting the denial.

Arm Ltd et al. v.DAEDALUS PRIME LLC

· IPR2025-00207

MediaTek and Daedalus Prime have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,984,228 and filed a joint motion to terminate the IPR as to MediaTek, leaving the proceeding active only for Arm Ltd.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

Zaxcom has requested Director Review of three IPRs, including IPR2025-00231. The petitioner, Rode Microphones, is limited to a brief response on the raised issues and may not submit new evidence.

Tesla, Inc. v.Intellectual Ventures II

· IPR2025-00218

The PTAB denied Tesla's request for Director Review of the decision that denied institution of IPR2025-00218, leaving the original denial in place.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.

· IPR2025-00002

The PTAB held that Samsung’s challenge to Netlist’s ’595 patent succeeded. All 24 claims were found obvious over prior‑art references Hazelzet, Buchmann and, for certain claims, Kim, rendering the patent unpatentable.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

Rode Microphones filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 14 claims of Zaxcom’s 9,336,307 patent, arguing that prior‑art systems render the claims anticipated or obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

The PTAB found all 16 challenged claims of Zaxcom’s 8,385,814 patent unpatentable as obvious over a combination of prior‑art references, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to replace those claims with new claims 50‑65.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

The PTAB held that claims 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15 of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent are unpatentable and granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend, replacing them with claims 21‑26.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

Rode Microphones successfully invalidated Zaxcom’s 9,336,307 patent. The PTAB found all 14 challenged claims unpatentable under §§102 and 103, adopting broad claim constructions and rejecting Zaxcom’s arguments. Substitute claims 15‑28 were approved.

patent instituted

Imperative Care, Inc. v.Inari Medical, Inc.

· IPR2025-00156

The PTAB instituted an inter partes review of Inari Medical’s 11,554,005 B2 embolism‑treatment patent after finding Imperative Care likely to prevail on at least one claim, primarily on obviousness grounds involving hemostasis valve features.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

· IPR2025-00230

The PTAB held that all six challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent are unpatentable for obviousness or anticipation, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend with substitute claims 21‑26. The Board’s claim constructions favored the petitioner’s broader interpretations.

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company et al. v.Intellectual Ventures II

· IPR2025-00202

Liberty Mutual and patent‑owner Intellectual Ventures have jointly moved to terminate IPR2025‑00202 after settling their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,332,844.

patent instituted

Imperative Care, Inc. v.Inari Medical, Inc.

· IPR2025-00156

Imperative Care has successfully instituted an inter partes review of Inari Medical’s 11,697,011 hemostasis valve patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over three prior‑art references. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability on at least one claim and ordered the trial to proceed.

HighLevel, Inc. v.Etison LLC d/b/a ClickFunnels

· IPR2025-00234

ClickFunnels (Etison LLC) submits an authorized response urging the PTAB Director to deny HighLevel’s request for a review, citing the Hulu decision and prior district‑court invalidity of the claims. The brief argues that instituting another IPR would be inefficient and that the petitioner’s reliance on the Ford case is misplaced.

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I

· IPR2025-00201

Liberty Mutual and Intellectual Ventures settled their inter partes review disputes over three patents, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceedings before institution. The settlement agreements were ordered confidential.

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00197

The PTAB denied Google’s request to institute an IPR against Mullen Industries’ OLED display patent, citing overlapping district‑court litigation and weak petition merits. The Director’s discretionary denial under 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) was upheld.

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I

· IPR2025-00200

Liberty Mutual and Intellectual Ventures have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,407,722 and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR.

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00197

Google has filed a petition for rehearing after the PTAB Director denied institution of its IPR against Mullen Industries’ 2021 wireless‑location patent. The petition argues the denial misapplied Fintiv factors, ignored a Sotera stipulation, and relied on a rescinded guidance memo.

MediaTek Inc. v.DAEDALUS PRIME LLC

· IPR2025-00243

MediaTek and Daedalus Prime have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,769,316, filing a joint motion to terminate the IPR before the Board decided any merits.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

· IPR2025-00230

The PTAB held that all six challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent are unpatentable, finding them obvious or anticipated over prior art such as Strub, Nagai, Gleissner, Woo, and Wood, and granted Zaxcom’s motion to amend with narrower substitute claims.

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

· IPR2025-00230

Rode Microphones has filed an IPR petition against Zaxcom’s 9,336,307 patent, asserting that all 14 claims are obvious or anticipated by existing wireless audio recording technology.