Judge Profile

Lisa A. Murray

44 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

44 cases indexed | Page 2 of 2

patent final · Sep 2, 2024

Microsoft Corporation et al. v.InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc. et al.

· IPR2024-00537

The Board issued a final written decision finding that the challenged claims were not unpatentable. The Board upheld the patent owner's position regarding priority and found that the specification adequately supported the combination of Bluetooth detection and Wi-Fi data transfer.

patent Final Written Decision · Aug 30, 2024

BMW of North America, LLC et al. v.Foras Technologies Limited

· IPR2024-01346

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision rejecting all claims of the '781 patent based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board found that while prior art references describe processor swapping or task management, they fail to teach the specific transfer of the 'role' of boot processor during runtime as claimed.

patent Final Written Decision · Aug 30, 2024

BMW of North America, LLC et al. v.Foras Technologies Limited

· IPR2024-01347

BMW challenged claims of Foras Technologies' patent related to switching the boot processor role in multi-processor systems. The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that the petitioner failed to prove unpatentability over prior art references.

patent terminated or settled · Jul 28, 2024

Hugging Face, Inc. v.FriendliAI Inc.

· IPR2024-01234

Hugging Face and FriendliAI settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,442,775 B1, leading the PTAB to terminate the IPR before institution. The settlement documents were ordered to be kept confidential.

patent terminated or settled · Jul 24, 2024

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company et al.

· IPR2024-00979

Samsung, Google and Cerence entered a joint settlement that led to the termination of two inter partes review proceedings covering Cerence's automotive voice‑assistant patents. The Board granted the motion to terminate and ordered the settlement agreements to be kept confidential.

patent terminated or settled · Jul 24, 2024

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company et al.

· IPR2024-00978

Samsung, Google and Cerence reached a settlement that led the PTAB to terminate the IPR on patent 7,395,078. The Board found good cause to end the proceeding and kept the settlement documents confidential.

patent instituted · Jul 24, 2024

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company et al.

· IPR2024-00979

Samsung Electronics successfully petitioned for institution of IPR against Cerence Operating Company, arguing that the patent claims related to SMS audio messaging were obvious over prior art references including Dolan and Freedman. The PTAB found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim, moving the case into active litigation.

patent instituted · Jul 24, 2024

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Cerence Operating Company et al.

· IPR2024-00978

The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for Samsung against Cerence regarding claims related to voice messaging in mobile devices. The Board accepted the Petitioner's mapping that prior art discloses key elements, despite challenges from the Patent Owner on claim definitions.

patent instituted · Jul 11, 2024

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.KP INNOVATIONS 2, LLC

· IPR2025-00101

Samsung Electronics' IPR challenge against KP Innovations was denied institution by the PTAB, despite arguments of anticipation and obviousness. The Board cited concerns over inefficient use of time and resources to decline institution, though a dissent argued for prevailing likelihood.

patent denied · May 30, 2024

Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.

· IPR2024-00980

The PTAB denied Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology's IPR challenge against CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.'s virtual clothing measurement patent. The Board found no motivation in the prior art (Grinspun and Graphicxtras) to combine them to achieve the claimed method of measuring 2D patterns with separation awareness.

patent denied · May 30, 2024

Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.

· IPR2024-00970

The PTAB denied the institution of an IPR challenging CLO Virtual Fashion's digital clothing patent (10,733,773) after finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success. The Board rejected the obviousness arguments based on impermissible hindsight and unsupported expert testimony.

patent denied · May 30, 2024

Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. v.CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.

· IPR2024-00967

The PTAB denied the IPR petition filed by Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. against CLO Virtual Fashion, Inc.'s patent 11,410,355, finding that the challenger failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success on obviousness grounds.

patent instituted · Mar 29, 2024

Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution, LLC v.Digital Media Technology Holdings, LLC

· IPR2024-00736

Disney Media & Entertainment Distribution successfully secured the institution of its IPR against Digital Media Technology Holdings regarding patent 7574725. The Board adopted broad claim constructions for key terms like 'distributing' and 'exhibiting,' favoring the Petitioner’s interpretation over the Patent Owner’s narrow industry definitions. This sets a favorable precedent for interpreting media technology claims broadly in PTAB proceedings.

patent final · Mar 29, 2024

Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution, LLC v.Digital Media Technology Holdings, LLC

· IPR2024-00736

The PTAB found the challenged claims unpatentable for obviousness (103), specifically concluding that prior art references taught every element of Independent Claim 1. The Board also adopted broad claim constructions, rejecting narrow interpretations proposed by the Patent Owner regarding terms like 'Exhibitor' and 'Distribution'.

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 →