Elizabeth M. Roesel
19 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
19 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1
Roku, Inc. v.Anonymous Media Research Holdings, LLC
Roku, Inc.'s IPR challenging Anonymous Media Research Holdings' content identification patent was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on its obviousness assertions against multiple prior art references.
Roku, Inc. v.Anonymous Media Research Holdings, LLC
The PTAB denied Roku's request to institute IPR against the '848 patent, finding that Petitioner failed to establish a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. The denial hinged on the failure of the Petitioner to prove that key prior art (Seet) was entitled to its provisional filing date due to lack of written description support for non-audio media.
Roku, Inc. v.Anonymous Media Research Holdings, LLC
Roku's IPR against Anonymous Media Research Holdings was denied because the key prior art reference (Seet) lacked written description support for non-audio media, preventing it from qualifying as prior art to the challenged patent.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
Samsung Electronics successfully petitioned to challenge Ouraring's patent (11874702) in a PGR proceeding, leading the PTAB to grant institution. The Board determined that the challenges based on prior art met the institutional threshold for trial.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
The PTAB denied a Post-Grant Review filed by Samsung against Oura Health's patent '701 because the Patent Owner had disclaimed all challenged claims.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
The PTAB denied an IPR petition filed by Samsung against Oura Health because the patent owner had disclaimed all challenged claims. This denial was based on procedural rules regarding pre-institution claim disclaimer.
MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.
MediaTek successfully secured institution at the PTAB against MOSAID Technologies regarding integrated circuit patents related to power management. The Board accepted Petitioner's showing of reasonable likelihood that claims are unpatentable over prior art references, including Takahashi and Mizuno.
US Conec Ltd. v.Senko Advanced Components, Inc.
US Conec Ltd. successfully secured institution of IPR against Senko Advanced Components, Inc.'s optical connector patent (11307369), challenging 22 claims based on obviousness and anticipation.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
The PTAB denied Samsung's Post-Grant Review petition against Ouraing because the patent owner had statutorily disclaimed all 16 challenged claims.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
Samsung Electronics successfully petitioned to challenge Oura Health's patent (11868178) in a PGR proceeding, leading the PTAB to institute the case. The Board found Petitioner's arguments regarding prior art disclosures for battery and PCB placement sufficient to proceed to trial.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR filed by Samsung against Oura Health because the patent owner had formally disclaimed all 12 challenged claims.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Oura Health Oy et al.
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Samsung against Oura Health regarding the 'Wearable Computing Device' patent (9582034). The Board found a reasonable likelihood that Samsung would prevail on grounds of obviousness over LeBoeuf.
MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.
MediaTek successfully challenged MOSAID's patent (7224563) in the PTAB, leading to institution of the IPR. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds of obviousness over prior art references like Tam and Huard.
US Conec Ltd. v.Senko Advanced Components, Inc.
The PTAB denied US Conec's request to institute IPR against Senko Advanced Components, finding that the Petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any challenged claims related to fiber optic connectors.
MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.:
MediaTek Inc. successfully petitioned to institute an IPR against MOSAID Technologies Inc.'s patent, challenging all 64 claims based on obviousness (103). The Board found that MediaTek demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing by combining prior art references Nowka and Borkar in the field of integrated circuit power management.
MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.:
The PTAB denied MediaTek's IPR challenge against MOSAID regarding power management technology. Despite a dissenting judge arguing for reasonable likelihood based on Nowka and Borkar, the Board found Petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient motivation or intrinsic support for its obviousness theories.
MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.
The PTAB denied MediaTek's IPR against MOSAID, finding that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability over prior art references related to integrated circuit power management.
MediaTek Inc. et al. v.MOSAID Technologies Inc.
The PTAB denied MediaTek's IPR against MOSAID's patent 8253438. The Board found that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of showing obviousness over prior art references like Takahashi and Mizuno, particularly regarding the 'plurality of power islands' limitation.
Champion Laboratories, Inc. et al. v.HENGST SE
The PTAB decided to institute the IPR challenge against HENGST SE's patent, finding that Petitioner met the reasonable likelihood standard for claim 1 despite parallel district court litigation. The Board determined that Fintiv factors outweighed those favoring discretionary denial.
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.