Judge Profile

Cynthia M. Hardman

51 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

51 cases indexed | Page 2 of 2

patent denied · Sep 30, 2024

Eunsung Global Corp. v.HydraFacial LLC et al.

· IPR2024-01491

The PTAB denied institution for an IPR challenge regarding skin treatment systems due to substantial overlap with parallel ITC proceedings and advanced litigation. This decision emphasizes resource conservation when multiple venues address the same prior art.

patent terminated or settled · Sep 16, 2024

ETN CAPITAL, LLC d/b/a BEECH LANE v.FBA Operating Co.

· IPR2024-01445

The IPR concerning patent 10,890,925 was terminated after the parties reached a settlement. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement agreement to be treated as confidential business information.

patent instituted · Sep 16, 2024

ETN CAPITAL, LLC d/b/a BEECH LANE v.FBA Operating Co.

· IPR2024-01445

The PTAB institution decision found that the Petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on all asserted grounds (Grounds 1-6). The patent, related to vehicle leveling systems using smart devices, was deemed potentially invalid based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103) when combining prior art references like Thorpe and Clark.

patent final · Sep 16, 2024

Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v.California Institute of Technology et al.

· IPR2024-01451

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision rejecting all claims (1-19) of the '921 patent. The Board rejected arguments based on obviousness and novelty, particularly concerning multi-occupancy droplet detection in multiplexed biochemical assays.

patent terminated or settled · Sep 2, 2024

Dexcom, Inc. v.Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.

· IPR2024-00521

Dexcom and Abbott Diabetes Care settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,298,056 covering continuous glucose monitoring technology. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate, and the Board granted termination without a final written decision.

patent instituted · Sep 2, 2024

Dexcom, Inc. v.Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.

· IPR2024-00521

Dexcom successfully petitioned to institute an IPR against Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.'s glucose monitoring patent (11298056). The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on grounds of obviousness (103) for claims 13 and 29.

patent denied · Aug 2, 2024

Nexus Pharmaceuticals LLC v.Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC

· PGR2024-00016

Nexus Pharmaceuticals' PGR challenge against Exela Pharma Sciences was denied institution because the arguments regarding enablement, written description, and obviousness were largely identical to those previously presented during prosecution. The Board found that the Patent Owner successfully demonstrated how process controls overcome prior rejections, leading to a denial of the petition under § 325(d).

patent instituted · Jul 17, 2024

MPL Brands NV, Inc. v.BuzzBallz, LLC

· IPR2024-01098

MPL Brands NV successfully petitioned to institute IPR against BuzzBallz, LLC regarding container design patents. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on anticipation and obviousness over prior art references like Kick. Trial is now pending for the challenged claims.

patent final · Jul 17, 2024

MPL Brands NV, Inc. v.BuzzBallz, LLC

· IPR2024-01098

The PTAB issued a final written decision finding all six claims of the '904 patent unpatentable. The Board determined that the claimed features were anticipated or obvious over prior art references (Kick, Ackermann, Kaminski, Hutchinson).

patent denied · Jul 15, 2024

Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v.California Institute of Technology et al.

· IPR2024-01178

The PTAB denied Bio-Rad Laboratories' request for rehearing regarding the denial of institution in IPR2024-01178, upholding its finding that the petitioner failed to meet the burden of proving unpatentability.

patent instituted · Jul 6, 2024

MPL Brands NV, Inc. v.BuzzBallz, LLC

· PGR2024-00035

MPL Brands NV successfully petitioned for institution of its obviousness challenge against BuzzBallz's beverage container patent (11932441). The Board found that the design application introduced new matter, making the claims eligible for review.

patent denied · Jul 6, 2024

MPL Brands NV, Inc. v.BuzzBallz, LLC

· IPR2024-01000

The PTAB denied MPL Brands NV's request to institute Inter Partes Review against BuzzBallz LLC's patent. The denial was based on the IPR petition being filed prematurely while a concurrent Post-Grant Review proceeding was active.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Jul 6, 2024

MPL Brands NV, Inc. v.BuzzBallz, LLC

· PGR2024-00035

MPL Brands NV successfully convinced the PTAB that all 20 claimed claims of the patent were unpatentable. The Board found obviousness over multiple prior art references, including PCAN, Metzger, and Kaminski, in a final decision.

patent instituted · Jun 12, 2024

ResMed Corp. v.Cleveland Medical Devices, Inc.

· IPR2025-00160

The PTAB granted institution for ResMed Corp.'s IPR against Cleveland Medical Devices, Inc., finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. The Board overcame arguments regarding parallel District Court litigation by applying the Fintiv factors.

patent instituted · Jun 12, 2024

ResMed Corp. v.Cleveland Medical Devices, Inc.

· IPR2025-00159

ResMed Corp. successfully petitioned for institution of its IPR against Cleveland Medical Devices, Inc.'s patent covering CPAP systems. The Board declined discretionary denial, finding that the petitioner adequately demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on both 102 and 103 grounds.

patent instituted · Jun 12, 2024

ResMed Corp. v.Cleveland Medical Devices, Inc.

· IPR2025-00158

ResMed Corp. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Cleveland Medical Devices, Inc.'s patent (No. 11690512). The Board found that ResMed demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on Ground 1, allowing the challenge to proceed despite neutral merits.

patent instituted · May 4, 2024

TikTok Inc. et al. v.Cellspin Soft, Inc.

· IPR2024-00770

TikTok Inc. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Cellspin Soft, Inc.'s patent covering Bluetooth data transfer and content publishing. The Board found sufficient evidence that the claims are obvious over various combinations of prior art references.

patent instituted · May 4, 2024

TikTok Inc. et al. v.Cellspin Soft, Inc.

· IPR2024-00769

TikTok and its affiliates successfully petitioned for institution in an IPR against Cellspin Soft regarding wireless communication patents. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on obviousness over multiple prior art references, including Singh129/Singh906 and Kahn/Bluetooth.

patent instituted · May 4, 2024

TikTok Inc. et al. v.Cellspin Soft, Inc.

· IPR2024-00768

TikTok Inc. successfully navigated the institution phase of an IPR against Cellspin Soft, Inc., leading to a decision that reasonable likelihood of unpatentability was established for claims 1-10 over Singh129 and Singh906. The Board found that Petitioner adequately demonstrated material error in prior art consideration during prosecution regarding Ground 2.

patent instituted · May 4, 2024

TikTok Inc. et al. v.Cellspin Soft, Inc.

· IPR2024-00767

TikTok Inc.'s challenge to Cellspin Soft's patent was instituted by the PTAB, finding a reasonable likelihood that at least one challenged claim is unpatentable. The Board focused on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103) over prior art references including Hiroishi, Kahn, and Bluetooth specifications. This decision sets up trial proceedings to determine if the combination of existing technologies renders the patent claims invalid.

patent denied · Jan 31, 2024

Dexcom, Inc. v.Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.

· IPR2024-00520

Dexcom failed to convince the PTAB that Abbott's glucose monitoring patent was unpatentable based on obviousness grounds. The Board denied institution, finding insufficient evidence across multiple prior art combinations.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Facing a similar IP matter?

Arctic Invent is a specialist IP firm with deep litigation expertise across India, EU, US, and UK. Our team uses data-driven strategy to build stronger cases.

Consult our team →