DAVID C. McKONE
67 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
67 cases indexed | Page 3 of 3
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
The PTAB held that 22 of the 23 claims of the Noco Company’s jump‑starter patent are unpatentable, finding the claims anticipated or obvious over multiple prior‑art references, while claim 11 survived.
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
ADC Solutions Auto LLC successfully petitioned for institution against The Noco Company's patent covering portable jump starter apparatuses. The Board found that the prior art presented in the petition was not substantially the same as what was before the Office during prosecution, satisfying the Advanced Bionics framework. This allows the case to proceed to substantive review on obviousness grounds (35 U.S.C. § 103).
Microsoft Corporation v.Proxense, LLC
Microsoft Corporation successfully petitioned for IPR against Proxense, LLC's patent (8646042) based on obviousness grounds. The Board granted institution after finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple combinations of prior art references.
Microsoft Corporation v.Proxense, LLC
The PTAB found all nine challenged claims unpatentable over the combination of Giobbi ’1573, Giobbi ’1394, and Dua. The Board successfully rejected arguments regarding means-plus-function interpretation, finding key terms like 'PDK' and 'RDC' conveyed sufficient definite structure. This decision represents a significant win for the Petitioner in this IPR proceeding.
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
The PTAB found all seven challenged claims of the portable jump starter apparatus unpatentable based on obviousness. The Board successfully applied two distinct combinations of prior art references (Richardson/Zhao and Yu/Paparrizos) to reject the claims.
Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.Throughtek Co., Ltd.
The PTAB institution decision found sufficient evidence of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for multiple claims related to peer-to-peer connection establishment. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that combining prior art references, such as the Lorex Guide and Kim, taught all limitations of several claimed features. This outcome significantly advances the challenge against the patent's validity in this technology area.
Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.Throughtek Co., Ltd.
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding the challenged claims unpatentable over various combinations of prior art. The Board specifically found Claim 1 obvious over Lorex Guide and Kim, while also addressing issues of written description and statutory eligibility.
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.