Deshpande
81 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
81 cases indexed | Page 2 of 3
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. et al. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display jointly settled eight IPR challenges to Patent 10,541,279, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceedings before trial.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR disputes, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceedings without a trial. The settlement agreement is confidential per 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
NRG Energy, Inc. et al. v.Malikie Innovations Ltd.
The IPR concerning Patent 11,119,756 was terminated after Vivint Smart Home, NRG Energy and Malikie Innovations reached a confidential settlement before the trial was instituted.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement agreement to remain confidential.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
Visa's claims against Cortex MCP were upheld by the PTAB Director in a review of the Final Written Decision. The Board confirmed that Oborne discloses the token verification limitation central to Visa's patent.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
Visa, Inc. successfully defended the Board's Final Written Decision in a Director Review proceeding against Cortex MCP, Inc., affirming that the challenged claims were unpatentable based on prior art Oborne.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
Visa's challenge to Cortex MCP's patent was upheld by the PTAB Director Review Panel. The panel affirmed the Board's finding that the prior art (Oborne) discloses the claimed credential verification limitation.
Arista Networks, Inc. v.Orckit Corporation
The DRP granted Director Review and vacated the Board's denial of institution for Arista Networks against Orckit Corporation. The decision corrected the claim construction and found a reasonable likelihood that Ashwood Smith teaches key limitations.
Menard, Inc. v.Signify Holdings B.V. et al.
The PTAB denied a request to vacate a Final Written Decision (FWD) because the Petitioner introduced new arguments regarding obviousness in its reply brief. The Board found that the initial petition lacked sufficient particularity to support the claims' unpatentability.
Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.
The PTAB held that all six challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent were unpatentable, adopting the petitioner’s claim constructions and granting Zaxcom’s motion to amend with substitute claims 21‑26.
Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.
The PTAB found all six challenged claims of Zaxcom’s ’902 patent unpatentable, adopting broader claim constructions and granting Zaxcom’s motion to amend with substitute claims 21‑26.
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
The USPTO denied Samsung’s petition for rehearing of the Director’s discretionary denial and institution denial in a series of IPRs against Telcom Ventures. The Board affirmed the earlier decisions, leaving the challenged patents intact.
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Telcom Ventures LLC
The USPTO denied Samsung’s request for rehearing of a director’s discretionary denial in IPR2025‑00974 and related cases, leaving Telcom Ventures’ patents untouched.
NIUM PTE. LTD. v.Intercurrency Software LLC
NIUM PTE. Ltd. and Intercurrency Software LLC settled their IPR dispute before trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate, dismissing the petition.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute (IPR2025-01557) before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate, keeping the settlement confidential. No claims were instituted or decided.
Nintendo Co., Ltd. et al. v.Malikie Innovations Ltd.
Nintendo and Malikie Innovations settled their IPR dispute, leading the Board to dismiss the petitions and terminate the proceedings.
Nintendo Co., Ltd. et al. v.Malikie Innovations Ltd.
Nintendo and Malikie Innovations settled their IPR dispute over patent 8,545,247 B2 before trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate, dismissing the petitions.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. et al. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled IPR2025-01477 before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate, keeping the settlement confidential. No claim validity was decided.
Bose Corporation v.IngenioSpec, LLC
Bose and IngenioSpec settled their IPR dispute. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and ordered the settlement agreement to remain confidential.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. et al. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology Group and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute over patent 11,574,990, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before trial.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. et al. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute over patent 11,574,991 B2 before trial, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. et al. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled eight related IPRs before trial, resulting in the Board terminating the proceedings on the parties' joint motion.
Atossa Therapeutics, Inc. v.Jina Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Atossa Therapeutics and Jina Pharmaceuticals settled their PTAB post‑grant review before trial, leading to a joint motion that terminated the proceeding. The settlement agreement is to remain confidential per the parties' request.
Microsoft Corporation v.Dialect, LLC
Microsoft and Dialect settled their IPR dispute over Patent 7,917,367 before trial, leading the Board to terminate the proceeding.
SNAP INC. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
Snap Inc. and Hisense settled their disputes with Nokia Technologies, leading the PTAB to terminate the IPRs before institution. The Board granted the parties' joint motions and kept the settlement agreements confidential.
Sandisk Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Longitude Flash Memory Solutions Ltd. et al.
SanDisk and Longitude settled their IPRs over flash‑memory patents before trial, leading the Board to dismiss the petitions and terminate the proceedings.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Radian Memory Systems LLC
Samsung Electronics and Radian Memory Systems settled their IPR dispute (IPR2025-01378) before trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and kept the settlement documents confidential.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute (IPR2025-01544) before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate, keeping the settlement confidential.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. et al. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 10,013,088 before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate, keeping the settlement confidential. No claim validity determinations were made.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute before trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate, ending the proceeding and keeping the settlement confidential.
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.