Judge Profile

Miriam L. Quinn

45 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

45 cases indexed | Page 2 of 2

patent instituted · Jul 10, 2024

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00019

Google LLC et al. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Mullen Industries LLC's patent on location services, despite initial concerns about discretionary denial. The Board found that Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing based on strong arguments regarding prior art obviousness and key claim construction terms.

patent instituted · Jul 10, 2024

Google LLC et al. v.Mullen Industries LLC

· IPR2025-00018

Google LLC et al. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Mullen Industries LLC's patent covering location services and tracking. The Board found sufficient evidence of non-obviousness, despite parallel district court litigation, leading to the institution of all 30 claims.

patent Final Written Decision · Jun 28, 2024

Apple Inc. v.Smith Interface Technologies, LLC

· IPR2024-01116

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision denying the petitioner's obviousness challenges against numerous claims of Smith Interface Technologies. The Board found that the asserted prior art combinations (Ahn and Chaudhri) failed to teach the specific functional limitations required by the patent claims, particularly regarding progressive gesture-based display transitions.

patent Final Written Decision · Jun 28, 2024

Apple Inc. v.Smith Interface Technologies, LLC

· IPR2024-01085

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding the claims patentable over the cited prior art. The Petitioner (Apple Inc.) failed to demonstrate that combining Ramos Paper, Ramos Video, and Ording would teach a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art how to implement the claimed translucent virtual display layer widget overlaying image content.

patent Final Written Decision · Jun 27, 2024

Apple Inc. v.Smith Interface Technologies, LLC

· IPR2024-01090

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that the claims were not unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board affirmed the Patent Owner's causal interpretation of 'when,' requiring all listed conditions to be met for functions to execute, and rejected obviousness arguments based on insufficient causal links in the prior art combination.

patent Final Written Decision · Jun 27, 2024

Apple Inc. v.Smith Interface Technologies, LLC

· IPR2024-01089

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding numerous claims of Smith Interface Technologies unpatentable over the combination of Hotelling, Martyn, and Cho. The Board adopted a specific definition for POSITA, requiring computer science expertise with professional GUI experience.

patent final · Jun 26, 2024

Apple Inc. v.Smith Interface Technologies, LLC

· IPR2024-01091

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision on the IPR, finding claims 30 and 62 unpatentable while upholding the patentability of claims 1, 32, 34, and 64. The Board clarified that 'the gesture' must refer to a single input with a common starting point, rejecting the Petitioner’s argument for multiple gestures.

patent Final Written Decision · Jun 26, 2024

Apple Inc. v.Smith Interface Technologies, LLC

· IPR2024-01088

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding 59 claims of the '758 patent unpatentable based primarily on obviousness (103) over Chaudhri, Martyn, and Griffin. The Board found sufficient motivation to combine these prior art references to teach numerous claimed features in the touch interface technology.

patent terminated or settled · Jun 25, 2024

Sony Corporation v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC

· IPR2024-01046

Sony and Optimum Imaging Technologies reached a settlement that resolved all disputes over U.S. Patent 10,877,266. The parties jointly moved to terminate the IPR, and the Board granted the termination and ordered the settlement agreement to be kept confidential.

patent Final Written Decision · Jun 3, 2024

Ericsson Inc. et al. v.XR COMMUNICATIONS LLC

· IPR2024-00613

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision rejecting the petitioner's contentions that the patent was unpatentable over Agee or in combination with Butler. The Board found Petitioner failed to meet its burden of proof, specifically regarding how prior art disclosed critical signal processing limitations.

patent terminated or settled · May 20, 2024

Sony Corporation v.Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC

· IPR2024-00923

Sony and Optimum Imaging Technologies settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,873,685. The parties jointly moved to terminate the IPRs, and the PTAB granted the termination while keeping the settlement agreement confidential.

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.

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 denied · Feb 10, 2024

HP Inc. et al. v.Universal Connectivity Technologies Inc.

· IPR2024-01428

The PTAB denied institution for an IPR petition concerning serial data transmission and symbol encoding (Patent No. 7154905). The Board found that while the petitioner raised obviousness arguments, the merits of the case were not sufficiently strong to overcome procedural hurdles.

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 →