US PTAB IP Litigation
8,722 annotated decisions
Page 97 of 364 · 8,722 total
patent · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01235
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 17 claims of Telcom Ventures’ U.S. Patent 10,674,432, arguing they are obvious over a suite of prior‑art NFC and biometric references. The petition lists eight grounds covering the full claim set.
patent · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01236
Apple has filed a petition to cancel all 18 claims of Telcom Ventures' U.S. Patent 11,770,756, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition outlines six grounds invoking 35 U.S.C. § 103 and seeks full cancellation of the patent.
patent · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01233
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 19 claims of Telcom Ventures’ ’708 patent, arguing they are obvious over Carlson, ISO‑14443, Jazayeri and Birch references.
patent · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01232
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑4 of Telcom Ventures’ ’411 patent, alleging obviousness over prior‑art NFC payment systems combined with biometric authentication. Two grounds are presented, differing on the interpretation of “physiological data.”
patent · May 8, 2025
Red Hat, Inc. v.Competitive Access Systems, Inc.
· IPR2025-01381
Red Hat petitions the PTAB to invalidate Competitive Access Systems’ 8,228,801 patent, asserting that all 17 claims are obvious over earlier bandwidth‑sharing technologies. The petition relies on the Challener and Kotzin disclosures, with Held providing motivation for routing‑table features.
patent · May 8, 2025
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
· IPR2025-01249
Samsung and co‑petitioners have filed an IPR seeking to invalidate Omni MedSci’s U.S. Pat. 9,055,868, arguing the claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references covering optical diagnostic systems.
patent · May 8, 2025
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
· IPR2025-01251
Samsung and co‑petitioners have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 18 claims of Omni MedSci’s wearable health‑monitoring patent. They argue the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references and that collateral estoppel bars re‑litigation.
patent · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01238
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 16 claims of Telcom Ventures’ U.S. Patent 11,937,172, arguing the claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art references covering NFC‑based mobile payments and biometric authentication.
patent · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01237
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 14 claims of Telcom Ventures’ ’743 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references covering NFC‑based mobile payments.
patent · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01234
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 19 claims of Telcom Ventures’ U.S. Patent 10,219,199, alleging obviousness over a suite of prior‑art references covering NFC‑based mobile payments.
patent instituted · May 8, 2025
Regions Bank v.United Services Automobile Association
· IPR2025-01356
Institution of inter partes review (IPR2025-01356) was granted after a merits review, confirming the petitioner's reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
patent instituted · May 8, 2025
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Paneltouch Technologies LLC
· IPR2025-01267
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01267 after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. This decision confirms the proceeding will move forward to merits review.
patent instituted · May 8, 2025
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
· IPR2025-01254
The PTAB granted institution for the IPR challenge against patent 12268475 involving Samsung Electronics and Omni Medsci.
patent instituted · May 8, 2025
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
· IPR2025-01253
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01253 after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.
patent instituted · May 8, 2025
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
· IPR2025-01252
The USPTO Board granted institution for IPR2025-01252, allowing the challenger to proceed with the review.
patent instituted · May 8, 2025
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
· IPR2025-01251
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01251, allowing SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. to challenge OMNI MEDSCI, INC.'s patent 10874304.
patent instituted · May 8, 2025
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
· IPR2025-01250
The PTAB granted institution for the IPR challenge against patent 9651533 involving Samsung Electronics and Omni Medsci.
patent denied · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01238
The Board denied institution in IPR2025-01238 after reviewing the merits. The petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.
patent denied · May 8, 2025
Apple Inc. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
· IPR2025-01237
The USPTO Board denied institution for IPR2025-01237, finding the petitioner failed to meet the reasonable likelihood of prevailing standard. The decision reviewed multiple other proceedings under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
patent · May 6, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
· IPR2025-01069
Wilus seeks Director Review to overturn the PTAB’s institution of an IPR against its 802.11ax Wi‑Fi patent, arguing the Board ignored settled expectations, misapplied the diverse‑subject‑matter test, and ignored Samsung’s contradictory indefiniteness positions.
patent terminated or settled · May 6, 2025
Perplexity AI, Inc. v.Comet ML, Inc.
· IPR2025-01063
Perplexity AI and Comet ML reached a settlement covering all disputes over U.S. Patent 11,650,968, prompting the PTAB to terminate the IPR before instituting trial and to keep the settlement agreement confidential.
patent denied · May 6, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
· IPR2025-01069
The USPTO denied Samsung’s request for Director Review of the institution decision in IPR2025-01069, leaving the institution of the Wilus patent intact.
patent · May 6, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
· IPR2025-01069
Samsung challenges Wilus’s request for Director Review of the IPR institution, arguing examiner error and consistent claim constructions. The petitioner seeks denial of the review so the IPR can proceed.
patent terminated or settled · May 6, 2025
Perplexity AI, Inc. v.Comet ML, Inc.
· IPR2025-01063
Perplexity AI and Comet ML have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,650,968 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review, requesting the settlement be kept confidential.
