Judge Profile

Justin T. Arbes

37 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

37 cases indexed | Page 1 of 2

patent instituted · Dec 2, 2025

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al. v.XtreamEdge, Inc. et al.

· IPR2025-00486

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and Pensando Systems successfully convinced the PTAB that XtreamEdge's network testing claims are likely obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board issued an institution decision, moving the dispute toward trial on grounds of obviousness over multiple prior art references.

patent instituted · Oct 3, 2025

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.AlmondNet, Inc.

· IPR2025-00545

Amazon successfully challenged the '904 patent, leading to its institution after demonstrating a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability. The challenge focused on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103) regarding automated profile collection and data targeting methods.

patent instituted · Jul 4, 2025

Toyota Motor Corp. v.AutoConnect Holdings LLC

· PGR2025-00041

Toyota Motor Corp. successfully petitioned to challenge AutoConnect Holdings LLC's patent, leading the PTAB to institute proceedings on grounds of obviousness (103) and patent eligibility (101). The Board found it likely that multiple claims are unpatentable over prior art references like Hendry.

patent instituted · Jul 3, 2025

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al. v.Concurrent Ventures, LLC et al.

· IPR2025-00478

The PTAB institution decision found that Advanced Micro Devices and Pensando Systems demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The dispute concerns task scheduling and processing element synchronization in computer systems, involving combinations of prior art references like Dongare and Gewirtz.

patent denied · Jul 2, 2025

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

· IPR2025-00557

The PTAB denied RØDE Microphones' request for rehearing of its institution denial, finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate any Board error regarding the interpretation of Strub’s genlocking technique.

patent denied · Jul 2, 2025

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

· IPR2025-00557

The PTAB denied institution for the patent owner Zaxcom against Rode Microphones and Freedman Electronics regarding wireless audio synchronization claims. The Board found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on its obviousness grounds over prior art references like Strub and Woo.

patent instituted · May 5, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC

· IPR2025-00908

Apple Inc. successfully petitioned to challenge Apex Beam Technologies LLC's patent (11,108,639) in the PTAB, leading to institution of the IPR. The Board found sufficient evidence that the claims related to wireless scheduling mechanisms are unpatentable over combinations of Fakoorian-1 and Takahashi. This sets up a major IP battle regarding advanced cellular technology standards.

patent instituted · Apr 29, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC

· IPR2025-00907

Apple Inc. successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing in its IPR against Apex Beam Technologies LLC regarding claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11139944. The Board found that the combination of 3GPP standards documents renders the claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103, leading to institution of trial.

patent instituted · Apr 28, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC

· IPR2025-00901

The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Apple against Apex Beam Technologies over a wireless communication patent. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the combination of Lee, Freda, and Ly renders claims 1-20 obvious.

patent instituted · Apr 25, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC

· IPR2025-00911

Apple Inc. successfully challenged Apex Beam Technologies LLC's patent claims in a PTAB Institution Decision, arguing the wireless communications technology is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board instituted review on all 16 claimed limitations based on combinations of prior art references including Cirik and Wu.

patent instituted · Feb 14, 2025

Samsara Inc. v.Motive Technologies, Inc.

· IPR2025-00574

The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Samsara Inc. against Motive Technologies, Inc., challenging 7 claims in patent 11875580. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail on claim 1 based on prior art combinations.

patent instituted · Feb 5, 2025

Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC

· IPR2025-00904

The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Apple against Apex Beam, challenging 20 claims related to multi-antenna transmission in wireless systems. The Board found that Apple met the reasonable likelihood standard based on prior art references Kim and Chen.

patent denied · Jan 30, 2025

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al. v.XtreamEdge, Inc. et al.

· IPR2025-00479

The PTAB denied institution for Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and Pensando Systems in an IPR against XtreamEdge, finding they failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds. The Board specifically rejected arguments that prior art references taught the specific bandwidth determination limitations of the challenged claims.

patent instituted · Jan 17, 2025

Alliance Laundry Systems, LLC v.PayRange LLC.

· PGR2025-00028

The PTAB instituted trial on grounds of eligibility (101), anticipation (102), and obviousness (103) for all 20 claims related to mobile payment processing. The Board found that the Petitioner demonstrated a likelihood of unpatentability, despite some claim limitations being construed favorably to the Patent Owner.

patent instituted · Jan 17, 2025

Alliance Laundry Systems, LLC v.PayRange LLC.

· PGR2025-00027

The PTAB granted institution for Post-Grant Review on all 20 claims of the '920 patent covering mobile payment systems, facing challenges under § 101 (eligibility) and § 103 (obviousness). The Board found sufficient evidence to proceed with arguments regarding abstract ideas and inventive concepts.

patent instituted · Dec 19, 2024

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al. v.XtreamEdge, Inc. et al.

· IPR2025-00223

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) successfully petitioned to institute IPR proceedings against XtreamEdge regarding a PLD patent, demonstrating a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on key claims. The Board found that the combination of prior art references Seshadri and Biederman provided sufficient grounds for challenge under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable · Dec 18, 2024

GOOGLE LLC v.EscapeX IP LLC

· IPR2025-00337

Google LLC successfully invalidated EscapeX IP LLC's patent (10474687) in the PTAB, finding all 24 claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board relied on combinations of prior art references like Fuloria and Andler to demonstrate that the claimed content engagement systems were predictable advancements in social networking technology.

patent instituted · Sep 27, 2024

Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1

· IPR2024-01493

Western Digital Technologies successfully convinced the PTAB that its claims against Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 were non-obvious, leading to the institution of trial on all claims. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on Claim 1 based on combinations of Bowen and Sunai prior art.

patent instituted · Sep 23, 2024

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation

· IPR2024-01450

Cisco Systems successfully argued that multiple claims of Portsmouth Network Corporation's patent were unpatentable over prior art references Dziong and Sathyanath, specifically regarding network routing and bandwidth allocation. The PTAB found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on several key claims, leading to the institution of the IPR.

patent final · Sep 23, 2024

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation

· IPR2024-01450

The PTAB rejected Cisco's IPR challenge against the '088 patent, finding no grounds for obviousness over prior art references Dziong and Sathyanath. The Board construed the key term "other connections" narrowly to mean established connections with allocated bandwidth, favoring the Patent Owner's interpretation.

patent terminated or settled · Sep 20, 2024

Aktana, Inc v.Veeva Systems Inc.

· IPR2024-01443

Aktana and Veeva settled their dispute over patents 9,055,023 and 9,391,937, leading the PTAB to terminate both inter partes review proceedings before institution. The settlement agreement was ordered confidential and kept separate from the patent files.

patent denied · Sep 16, 2024

Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1

· IPR2024-01449

Western Digital Technologies, Inc. failed its IPR challenge against a patent owned by Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 regarding Magnetic Tunnel Junctions (MTJ). The PTAB denied the petition on obviousness grounds (103), finding that the petitioner could not establish a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.

patent denied · Sep 16, 2024

Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1

· IPR2024-01448

The PTAB denied institution of an IPR petition filed by Western Digital Technologies against Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 because the patent owner had statutorily disclaimed all challenged claims.

patent Final Written Decision · Sep 16, 2024

Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1

· IPR2024-01447

The PTAB found claims 1 and 2 unpatentable over the combination of Bowen and Parkin's prior art references. The Board concluded that combining these references taught all elements of the challenged claims, including a rationale for using amorphous, annealed CoFeB electrodes to achieve high TMR. Claims 3 and 4 were not found unpatentable.

patent Final Written Decision · Aug 28, 2024

Adobe Inc. v.Jaffe, Jonathan

· IPR2024-01352

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision rejecting all claims of the '828 Patent. The Board adopted the Patent Owner's narrow claim construction, specifically requiring monitoring of the physical coupling between the sensor and memory. Petitioner failed to demonstrate that any combination of prior art references renders the claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

patent denied · Jun 9, 2024

Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Scale Video Coding LLC

· IPR2024-01371

The PTAB denied Cisco Systems' IPR petition against Scale Video Coding LLC, finding the asserted claims were not reasonably likely to be unpatentable over prior art references. The decision focused on technical limitations regarding bandwidth identification in video routers.

patent instituted · May 31, 2024

Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation

· IPR2024-00989

The PTAB instituted the IPR petition filed by Juniper Networks against Portsmouth Network Corporation, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds. The Board specifically accepted arguments that challenged claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and others based on obviousness over Blease in view of Weyman and Hu.

patent Final Written Decision · May 31, 2024

Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation

· IPR2024-00913

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that ten of the fifteen challenged claims were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on various combinations of prior art references (Blease, Weyman, Hu, Deng). The Board found sufficient motivation to combine Blease and Weyman for distributed architecture features, while also finding that combining Blease/Weyman with Hu was plausible for bandwidth efficiency improvements.

patent instituted · Apr 12, 2024

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

· IPR2025-00232

The PTAB Institute Decision granted trial for Rode Microphones and Freedman Electronics against Zaxcom regarding wireless audio recording systems. The Board found that the Petitioner successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim, despite procedural hurdles related to parallel district court litigation.

patent instituted · Apr 12, 2024

Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.

· IPR2025-00230

Rode Microphones and Freedman Electronics successfully petitioned for IPR institution against Zaxcom's audio recording patents, demonstrating a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. The Board found that the combination of Strub and Woo renders the claimed synchronization methods obvious under § 103.

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 →