Justin T. Arbes
50 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
50 cases indexed | Page 1 of 2
Aktana, Inc v.Veeva Systems Inc.
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.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that claims 1-18 of the patent were unpatentable on grounds of obviousness over Kovvali and Kalman. The Board rejected the Petitioner's arguments, agreeing with the Patent Owner that there was no valid motivation to combine the references for resource allocation in ring topology data flow.
Cisco Systems Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
The PTAB found that a large group of claims (15) were unpatentable over the prior art reference Gai under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Board relied on Petitioner's '1B' theory, which successfully demonstrated obviousness by showing Gai disclosed all limitations of the claimed network topology and dummy traffic function. Claims 11, 12, 23, and 24 survived the challenge.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
The PTAB found the patent claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on various combinations of prior art references. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that combining existing network technologies taught or rendered obvious the claimed limitations, particularly in multicast routing and packet processing.
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding several claims of the '986 patent unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Board concluded that the combination of prior art references, including Gai and an IEEE publication, taught the full scope of the claimed network failure recovery method.
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
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.
Adobe Inc. v.Jaffe, Jonathan
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.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
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.
Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al. v.Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
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.
GOOGLE LLC v.EscapeX IP LLC
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.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
Cisco Systems successfully navigated a discretionary denial challenge at the PTAB, leading to the institution of an IPR against Portsmouth Network Corp. over network resource allocation claims. The Board found that Cisco demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim, despite arguments regarding prior art redundancy and pending district court litigation.
Cisco Systems Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
The PTAB decided to institute the IPR, finding that Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim. The Board agreed with the petitioner's argument that prior art reference Gai teaches or suggests key limitations related to dummy traffic and spanning tree protocol operation in network switches.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
Cisco Systems successfully petitioned to challenge Portsmouth Network Corporation's patent (8014394) in an IPR proceeding, leading the PTAB to institute the case. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for several claims based on obviousness over prior art references Weyman and Li.
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
The PTAB granted institution for an IPR concerning network reconfiguration protocols, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the grounds of obviousness (103). The patent relates to methods for rapid link failure recovery in Switching/Routing Protocols (STP).
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
Juniper Networks successfully navigated the PTAB's institution standards, leading to trial on numerous claims of Portsmouth Network Corporation's patent. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing based on obviousness grounds over Blease in view of Weyman and Hu.
Juniper Networks, Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
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.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Scale Video Coding LLC
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.
Tessell, Inc. v.Nutanix, Inc.
Tessell, Inc. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Nutanix, Inc., regarding database provisioning technology. The Board found that Tessell demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds over multiple prior art combinations.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.AlmondNet, Inc.
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.
Rode Microphones, LLC et al. v.Zaxcom, Inc.
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.
Samsara Inc. v.Motive Technologies, Inc.
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.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Apple Inc. against Apex Beam Technologies LLC, finding a reasonable likelihood that the combination of Chen and 3GPP renders at least one claim obvious.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
Apple successfully secured the institution of an IPR against Apex Beam Technologies, challenging 20 claims related to massive MIMO transmission. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing based on obviousness over prior art references Kim and Chen.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
Apple Inc. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Apex Beam Technologies LLC's patent, demonstrating a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for claims 1-20 based on prior art.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
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.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
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.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
Apple Inc. successfully established a reasonable likelihood of prevailing in its IPR against Apex Beam Technologies LLC regarding 5G NR physical layer procedures. The Board found that various 3GPP technical specifications collectively teach the claimed inventions, leading to institution on grounds of obviousness and anticipation.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
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.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
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.
Apple Inc. v.Apex Beam Technologies LLC
Apple Inc.'s IPR against Apex Beam Technologies LLC's '695 patent covering 5G NR uplink cancellation has been instituted. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success on the obviousness grounds over prior art references Ying and Yang for Claim 1, setting up a trial on all 20 claims.
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.