Judge Profile

Richard H. Marschall

36 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

36 cases indexed | Page 2 of 2

patent terminated or settled · Apr 4, 2024

NULIDS, LLC v.BlephEx, LLC

· IPR2024-00764

NULIDS, LLC and BlephEx, LLC settled their IPR dispute before trial, leading the Board to dismiss the petition and terminate the proceeding.

patent terminated or settled · Mar 29, 2024

Toyota Motor Corporation et al. v.Infogation Corp.

· IPR2024-00756

Toyota and Infogation settled their IPR dispute over patent 6,292,743 B1, leading the Board to dismiss the case before a trial. The settlement agreement is treated as confidential under statutory provisions.

patent terminated or settled · Mar 22, 2024

Loco Crazy Good Cookers, Inc. v.North Atlantic Imports, LLC

· IPR2024-00642

The IPR concerning U.S. Patent 10,660,473 was terminated after the petitioner and patent owner reached a settlement and jointly moved to dismiss the proceeding.

patent instituted · Mar 22, 2024

Loco Crazy Good Cookers, Inc. v.North Atlantic Imports, LLC

· IPR2024-00642

Loco Crazy Good Cookers challenged North Atlantic Imports' cooking appliance patent on grounds of obviousness and anticipation. The PTAB instituted review, finding a reasonable likelihood that at least one claim would be obvious based on the prior art references. This moves the dispute toward trial preparation in District Court.

patent instituted · Feb 5, 2024

Exotec Product France SAS et al. v.Opex Corporation

· IPR2024-00850

Exotec Product France SAS and co-petitioner successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Opex Corporation's patent, arguing that the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success based on combining prior art references Raizer and Hangzhou in the field of Automated Warehouse Robotics.

patent final · Feb 5, 2024

Exotec Product France SAS et al. v.Opex Corporation

· IPR2024-00850

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 27 challenged claims unpatentable over prior art references Raizer and Hangzhou. The Board determined that an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine the teachings of these references to solve known industry problems like congestion and inefficiency in automated material handling systems.

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 →