US PTAB IP Litigation
5,620 annotated decisions
Page 98 of 235 · 5,620 total
patent · Jan 23, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Ouraring, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-00147
Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Oura’s finger‑ring health‑monitor patent, arguing the claims are obvious over three prior‑art references. The petition also urges the Board not to deny institution under the Fintiv provision.
patent instituted · Jan 23, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Ouraring, Inc. et al.
· IPR2025-00147
The PTAB has instituted the IPR against Ouraring, Inc. et al., finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. on multiple grounds of obviousness (103). The institution decision targets 17 claims related to smart rings and biometric monitoring technology.
patent · Jan 22, 2025
NXP USA, INC. et al. v.Redstone Logics LLC
· IPR2025-00485
NXP and Redstone Logics filed a joint motion to dismiss NXP as a co‑petitioner in IPR2025‑00485, citing an agreement in principle and statutory bars on further petitions. The Board’s authority to dismiss a co‑petitioner pre‑institution is argued, with no settlement‑agreement requirement.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 22, 2025
Nokia of America Corp. v.ADAPTIVE SPECTRUM AND SIGNAL ALIGNMENT, INC.
· IPR2025-00492
Nokia and Adaptive Spectrum and Signal Alignment, Inc. have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent No. 7,593,458 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board is asked to treat the settlement agreement as business‑confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 22, 2025
Nokia of America Corp. v.ADAPTIVE SPECTRUM AND SIGNAL ALIGNMENT, INC.
· IPR2025-00492
Nokia and Adaptive Spectrum reached a settlement, leading the PTAB to terminate the IPR before trial. The settlement agreement was ordered to be kept confidential under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
patent terminated or settled · Jan 22, 2025
Nokia of America Corp. v.Adaptive Spectrum and Signal Alignment, Inc.
· IPR2025-00428
Nokia and Adaptive Spectrum and Signal Alignment, Inc. filed a joint motion to terminate an IPR concerning U.S. Patent 7,991,122. The PTAB granted the motion and ordered the settlement agreement to be kept confidential, ending the proceeding before trial.
patent · Jan 22, 2025
Nokia of America Corp. v.Adaptive Spectrum and Signal Alignment, Inc.
· IPR2025-00428
Nokia has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Adaptive Spectrum’s DSL‑crosstalk patent, arguing that the invention is obvious over three prior‑art references that were never considered during prosecution.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 21, 2025
LG Electronics, Inc. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2025-00519
LG Electronics and Maxell settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 7,421,188 B2. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate the IPR, and the Board granted the termination before instituting a trial.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 21, 2025
LG Electronics Inc. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2025-00518
LG Electronics and Maxell have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 6,856,760 and jointly moved to have the settlement agreement treated as business confidential information, effectively terminating the proceeding.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 21, 2025
LG Electronics, Inc. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2025-00519
LG Electronics and Maxell have reached a settlement and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent 7,421,188. The motion cites statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. §317(a) and public‑policy reasons favoring settlement.
patent denied · Jan 21, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company
· IPR2025-00460
Samsung’s request for Director Review of the PTAB’s denial to institute its IPR against Cerence’s in‑vehicle voice‑control patent was denied, leaving the original denial intact.
patent denied · Jan 21, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company
· IPR2025-00459
Samsung’s request for Director Review of the PTAB’s denial of institution for its IPR against Cerence’s voice‑control patent was rejected. The Board affirmed that all Fintiv factors favored discretionary denial, rendering the review request untenable.
patent · Jan 21, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company
· IPR2025-00460
Samsung Electronics filed Director Review requests for three IPRs against Cerence Operating Company. The PTAB has limited the Patent Owner to a brief, evidence‑free response, and the Director will decide on the review.
patent denied · Jan 21, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company
· IPR2025-00458
Samsung has filed a request for Director Review, arguing that the PTAB director improperly denied institution of its IPR against Cerence’s in‑car voice‑assistant patent. The petition cites misuse of Fintiv factors, unsupported settled‑expectations claims, and a failure to meet §314(c) notice requirements.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 21, 2025
LG Electronics, Inc. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.
· IPR2025-00520
LG Electronics and Maxell settled their inter partes review of U.S. Patent 10,244,284 B2, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before a trial was instituted.
patent · Jan 21, 2025
LG Electronics, Inc. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.
· IPR2025-00520
LG Electronics petitions the PTAB to invalidate Maxell’s U.S. Patent 10,244,284 covering a display apparatus and video processing method, arguing that claims 18‑20 are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references involving dual‑radio devices, Bluetooth, WLAN, and related standards.
patent · Jan 21, 2025
LG Electronics Inc. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
· IPR2025-00518
LG Electronics has filed an IPR petition challenging Maxell’s 6,856,760 patent covering recording media and thumbnail images. The petition asserts that claims 1‑9 are obvious over six prior‑art references and argues that PTAB discretion should not block institution.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 20, 2025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Koninklijke KPN N.V.
· IPR2025-00504
Samsung and KPN have reached a confidential settlement and jointly moved to terminate the IPR over U.S. Patent 8,459,151, citing public‑policy reasons for early termination.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 20, 2025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Koninklijke KPN N.V.
· IPR2025-00504
Samsung and KPN settled all patent disputes by executing a settlement, license and non‑assertion agreement that grants Samsung worldwide rights to KPN’s patents and ends the IPR proceeding.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 20, 2025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Koninklijke KPN N.V.
· IPR2025-00504
Samsung and Dutch telecom KPN settled their dispute, filing a joint motion that led the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review of KPN’s patent before institution. The settlement agreement is to be kept confidential.
patent · Jan 20, 2025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Koninklijke KPN N.V.
· IPR2025-00504
Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging KPN’s 8,549,151 patent covering SIP/RTSP gateway functionality. The petition relies on three obviousness grounds citing Alston, Gateva, Mela, and Fajardo. Institutional decision is pending.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 18, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Koninklijke KPN N.V.
· IPR2025-00512
Samsung Electronics and KPN settled their disputes and jointly moved to terminate six inter partes review proceedings, including IPR2025-00512 covering U.S. Patent 8,881,235. The Board granted the termination and ordered the settlement agreement to be kept confidential.
patent terminated or settled · Jan 18, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Koninklijke KPN N.V.
· IPR2025-00512
Samsung Electronics and Dutch telecom firm KPN have reached a confidential settlement, jointly moving to terminate the pending IPR on U.S. Patent 8,881,235. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a).
patent · Jan 18, 2025
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Koninklijke KPN N.V.
· IPR2025-00512
Samsung has filed a petition to institute an IPR against KPN’s U.S. Patent 8,881,235 covering service‑based authentication in cellular networks, arguing that the claims are obvious over 3GPP standards, an IETF draft, Aldera, and Naslund. The petition also urges the Board not to deny institution under discretionary statutes.
