Judge Profile

Matthew S. Meyers

37 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

37 cases indexed | Page 2 of 2

patent denied · Mar 4, 2024

Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.

· IPR2024-00766

The PTAB denied Dyson's IPR challenge against Omachron's vacuum cleaner patent (10,568,477). The Board found that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success, rejecting arguments based on prior art references like Brown and Dimbylow.

patent instituted · Feb 14, 2024

Tesla, Inc. v.Graphite Charging Company LLC

· IPR2024-00388

Tesla successfully navigated the PTAB's discretionary denial hurdles, leading to the institution of its IPR challenge against Graphite Charging Company LLC. The Board found that Tesla demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on grounds of anticipation and obviousness over prior art references like Wang and Cooley.

patent final · Feb 14, 2024

Tesla, Inc. v.Graphite Charging Company LLC

· IPR2024-00388

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that the claims were not unpatentable by either anticipation (Cooley) or obviousness (Wang/AESO Report). The Board adopted the Patent Owner's claim construction of 'current' as referring to the present, rejecting the petitioner's interpretation.

patent terminated or settled · Feb 7, 2024

Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.

· IPR2024-01151

Dyson and Omachron settled their inter partes review disputes, leading the PTAB to terminate four IPRs involving Dyson patents. The settlement agreement is treated as confidential business information.

patent instituted · Feb 7, 2024

Dyson Technology Limited et al. v.Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.

· IPR2024-01151

Dyson successfully petitioned to invalidate Omachron's patent (11910984) covering surface cleaning apparatus. The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds, including obviousness based on Dimbylow and Howes.

patent terminated or settled · Feb 1, 2024

SHENZHEN PINCAN TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD v.The Ridge Wallet LLC

· IPR2024-00340

The IPR concerning Ridge Wallet's patent 10,791,808 was terminated after the parties reached a confidential settlement. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement kept separate from the patent file.

patent instituted · Feb 1, 2024

SHENZHEN PINCAN TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD v.The Ridge Wallet LLC

· IPR2024-00340

Shenzhen Pincan Technology challenged The Ridge Wallet's patent (10791808) for obviousness over prior art, successfully securing an IPR institution decision. The Board rejected the Patent Owner's arguments regarding real parties in interest and time bar issues.

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 →